of  IHMwj^ 

m  ;  2000 


DG  317    .N4  1905  v. 2 
Negri,  Gaetano,  1838-1902. 
Julian  the  Apostate 


I 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


https://archive.org/details/julianapostate02negr 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Froiitispi 


>iece  to  Vol.  II. 


JULIAN 
THE  APOSTATE 


BY 

GAETANO  NEGRI 


TRANSLATED 

FROM  THE  SECOND  ITALIAN  EDITION 
BY  THE 

DUCHESS  LITTA-VISCONTI-ARESE 

WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION 
By  Professor  PASQUALE  VILLARI 


ILLUS  r RATED 


VOL.  IL 


NEW  YORK 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 
153-157  FIFTH  AVENUE 
1905 


OF  i^iNC£r5>.^ 


FEB  ^ 


All  Rights  Reserved 


CONTENTS 


Julian's  Action  against  Christianity  .  -321 

Religious  Tolerance  and  Administrative  Severity — 
The  Episode  of  the  Bishop  George — Popular 
Tumults  and  the  Persecutions  of  the  Christians — 
The  Destruction  by  Fire  of  the  Temple  of  Apollo 
— The  Exiled  Christians  recalled  —  Persecution 
of  Athanasius — The  Bishop  of  Bostra — The 
"School  Law" 


Julian's  Disillusion       .  .  .  .  .421 

The  General  Indifference — The  "  Case  "  of  Pegasius 
—  The  Misopogon  —  Analysis  of  the  Satire  — 
Importance  of  the  Misopogon. 


The  Sovereign  and  the  Man  .  .  .  -471 

Judgment  of  Ammianus — Judgment  of  Gregory — The 
Writings  of  Julian  —  The  Panegyrics  of  Con- 
stantius  —  The  Banquet  of  the  Ccesars  —  The 
Epistle  to  Themistius  —  The  Exhortation  to 
Sallustius — The  Letters  to  lamblichus — Letters 
to  Friends — The  Books  of  George — Admini- 
strative Reforms — Julian  and  Eusebia — Julian 
and  Helena. 


VI 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 


Conclusion 


591 


A  Retrospective  Glance — The  Two  Principles  of 
Christianity — Absence  of  Doctrinal  Apparatus — 
Gnosticism  —  Religion  and  Philosophy  —  The 
Position  of  Julian — Puritan  Polytheism — Julian 
did  not  understand  the  Principle  of  Redemption 
— Lack  of  Scientific  Spirit  in  him,  as  in  Chris- 
tianity— Progressive  Civilisation  and  Science — 
The  Condemnation  of  Julian  —  Extenuating 
Circumstances. 

Index       .......  633 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


Gaetano  Negri  . 

Coin  of  Constantine  the  Great 

Coin  of  Gratian 

Coin  of  Valens  . 

Coin  of  Theodosius 

Julian  .... 


Facing  page  321 


Frontispiece 


421 


From  a  Sardonyx  Intaglio. 


Coin  of  Constantine  the  Great. 


Coin  of  Valens. 


Coin  of  Gratian. 


To  face  page  321. 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


— ♦ — 

JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST 
CHRISTIANITY 

While  Julian  felt  his  life  in  jeopardy,  because  of 
the  suspicion  and  jealousy  of  Constantius,  or  even 
during  the  time  when  he  represented  him  in  the 
government  of  Gaul,  he  naturally  concealed  his 
ideas,  his  faith,  and  those  intentions  which  he 
could  only  accomplish  if  he  should  ever  attain 
supreme  power.  During  all  these  years  of  neces- 
sary dissimulation,  the  young  enthusiast,  who 
amidst  the  cares  of  war  and  administration  never 
neglected  his  studies  and  meditations,  became  ever 
more  fervently  zealous  in  his  love  of  Hellenism, 
and  in  his  desire  to  save  it  from  the  danger  of 
invading  Christianity,  his  ardour  necessarily  be- 
coming more  intense  because  of  his  inability  to 
express  it  openly.  But  ever  remembering  his 
strained  relations  with  Constantius,  he  took  pains 
not  to  compromise  himself  by  any  act  that  might 
some  day  create  insuperable  difficulties.  We  have 
seen,  on  the  contrary,  that,  after  he  had  been 

VOL.  IL  —  I 


322  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


proclaimed  Emperor  by  his  soldiers,  and  before 
he  had  decided  on  civil  war,  still  hoping  for  an 
understanding  with  Constantius,  he  participated 
in  the  solemn  festival  of  the  Epiphany,  thus 
manifesting  an  excess  of  prudence  that  might 
be  considered  deceit. 

But  when  all  illusions  of  a  possible  reconcilia- 
tion were  dissipated,  and  Julian  decided  on  the 
desperate  venture  of  marching  against  Constantius, 
he  dropped  his  mask,  and,  resolving  to  risk  every- 
thing, revealed  himself  as  the  restorer  of  the 
ancient  religion.  It  is  not  quite  clear  whether 
he  made  any  public  demonstration  of  his  poly- 
theistic faith  before  he  left  Gaul ;  but,  during 
the  voyage  from  Gaul  to  Sirmium,  he  openly 
and  somewhat  ostentatiously  gave  his  expedition 
the  character  of  an  enterprise,  placed  under  the 
protection  of  the  gods.  This  Julian  tells  us,  in 
a  letter  addressed  to  his  venerated  master,  the 
philosopher  Maximus,  and  written  while  he  was 
on  the  march  towards  the  Balkans.  In  the  midst 
of  the  urgent  affairs  that  claim  his  attention,  Julian 
is  grateful  to  the  gods  that  he  is  able  to  write  to 
Maximus,  and  hopes  that  he  may  be  permitted 
to  see  him  once  more.  He  protests,  and  calls 
the  gods  to  witness,  that  he  became  emperor 
against  his  will.^  Then,  with  the  facility  and  grace 
of  description  so  natural  to  him,  he  relates  his 

^  Julian.,  op.  cif.,  536.  Trptorov  avTOKparcop  cckcov  eyevofirjv  'laaaiv 
61  6eoi. 


JULIANA  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  323 


meeting  with  a  messenger  sent  by  Maximus 
himself,  and  expresses  all  the  anxiety  he  had 
experienced  at  the  thought  of  the  peril  to  which 
the  friend  and  master  of  the  rebellious  Caesar 
might  be  exposed.  In  concluding  the  letter,  he 
speaks  of  the  signal  favour  which  the  gods 
vouchsafed  to  his  enterprise,  so  that  it  was  being 
accomplished  without  violence  and  with  great  ease, 
and  he  thus  finishes:  ''We  adore  the  gods  openly, 
and  the  greater  part  of  the  army  accompanying 
me  is  devoted  to  them.  We  sacrifice  in  face  of 
all,  and  offer  to  the  gods  the  sacrifices  of  many 
hecatombs.  The  gods  command  me  to  sanctify 
my  every  action,  and  I  obey  them  with  all  my 
soul,  and  they  assure  me  of  great  benefits  from 
my  enterprise,  if  only  I  persist."^  Here  we  recog- 
nise the  confidence  and  enthusiasm  of  the  reformer 
in  his  first  efforts,  when  everything  appears  to 
him  bright  and  hopeful.  A  few  months  will 
be  sufficient  to  dispel  Julian's  delusions  and 
cause  him  to  write  that  effusion  of  bitterness, 
the  Misopogon. 

His  cousin  being  dead,  and  Julian  by  common 
consent  proclaimed  Emperor,  he  made  his  solemn 
entry  into  Constantinople,  and  gave  to  his  youthful 
dream  the  sanction  of  law.  "  Every  danger  having 
disappeared  "  —  writes  Ammianus  Marcellinus  — 
"  and  having  acquired  the  faculty  of  doing  all  that 
he  willed,  Julian  revealed  the  secrets  of  his  soul, 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  536,  19  sq. 


324 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


and,  with  clear  and  precise  decrees,  ordained  that 
the  temples  should  be  thrown  open,  the  victims 
presented  at  the  altars,  and  the  cult  of  the  gods 
restored."  ^ 

That  Julian  should  take  this  resolution  as  soon 
as  he  possessed  absolute  liberty  of  action  was,  of 
course,  only  natural.  But  what  was  his  conduct 
with  regard  to  Christianity,  in  which  he  recognised 
a  hateful  enemy  with  whom  he  was  about  to  engage 
in  a  mortal  duel  ?    This  is  the  most  interestinor 

o 

point  in  the  study  we  are  making  concerning  the 
person  and  actions  of  the  Emperor  Julian.  His 
first  movements  clearly  indicate  the  course  which 
he  intends  to  pursue.  While  providing  for  the 
reopening  of  the  temples  and  the  restoration  of 
the  Pagan  worship,  he  invited  to  the  palace  the 
heads  of  the  Christian  Church,  divided,  as  we 
know,  into  two  parties  who  cordially  hated  each 
other,  and,  before  the  Christian  congregations, 
who  also  were  admitted  into  the  presence  of  the 
Emperor,  he  courteously  admonished  them  to  quell 
their  discords  and  let  each  one  follow  his  own 
religion  without  fear  of  interference — ut  discordiis 
consopitis,  quique,  nullo  vetante,  religioni  suae 
serviret  intrepidus."  ^  With  this  discourse  to  the 
Christians  of  Constantinople,  Julian  re-established 
that  principle  of  religious  tolerance,  inaugurated 
by  Constantine  with  the    Edict  of   Milan,  and, 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit.^  i.  271,  8  sq. 
2  Ibid.^  op.  cit.^  i.  271,  15. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  325 


subsequently,  forgotten  by  him — a  principle  doomed 
to  be  extinguished  with  Julian,  only  to  rise  again 
after  fifteen  centuries  of  complete  obscurity.  Julian 
remained  faithful  to  this  principle  throughout  the 
whole  of  his  brief  career.    The  Christian  disputants 
and  historians — Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  Socrates, 
Sozomenes,  and  Rufinus — who  did  all  in  their  power 
to  place  the  Emperor's  actions  in  the  worst  possible 
light,  fail  most  signally  in  their  attempt  to  make 
him  appear  as  a  persecutor.    Certainly  some  acts 
of   violence  occurred  during  his  brief  reign,  but 
they  were  the  inevitable  consequences  of  party 
passions  and  the  habits  of  the  times.  Gregory 
bitterly  insinuates  that  Julian  was  pleased  to  allow 
a  free  hand  to  the  rabble,  reserving  to  himself  the 
glory  of  him  who  converts  by  persuasion,  and  he 
affirms  that  the  Emperor's  intention  was  to  injure 
the  Christians,  without  leaving  them  the  oppor- 
tunity of  assuming  the  noble  attitude  of  martyrs.^ 
This,  in  reality,  is  equivalent  to  an  acknowledgment, 
on  the  part  of  the  disputant,  that  there  were  no 
acts  of  violence  committed  by  the  orders  of  the 
Emperor.    Rufinus  was  forced  to  admit  that  Julian, 
more  astute  than  his  predecessors,  instead  of  useless 
cruelty,  resorted  to  flattery,  rewards,  and  exhorta- 
tions.   And  Socrates,  who  uses  the  word  ''persecu- 
tion," declares  that  he  understands  by  this  word 
any  act  that  may  interfere  in  the  slightest  degree 
with  the  well-being  of  timorous  persons.^ 

^  Greg.  Naz.,  Orat.  ii.  72-74.  ^  Socrat.,  op.  cit.^  151, 


326 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


It  is  true  that  the  ecclesiastical  historians  narrate 
a  few  episodes  that  might  justify  the  imputation  of 
persecution  attributed  to  Julian  ;  but  we  must  not 
forget  that  these  historians  wrote  a  century  after 
Julian's  death,  when  any  number  of  legends  had 
arisen,  all  equally  devoid  of  critical  foundation,  and 
the  more  acceptable  to  these  writers  when  most 
exaggerated.      Of    some   of    these   stories  the 
legendary  character  is  too  evident  for  us  to  give 
them  any  serious  consideration  ;  of  others,  which 
may  possibly  contain  certain  elements  of  truth,  the 
responsibility  should   not   be   attributed   to  the 
Emperor.    That  Julian,  having  the  power  in  his 
hands,  naturally  used  it  to  advance  the  cause  that 
he  defended,  that,  in  his  judgments  between  the 
two  parties,  he  employed  different  weights  and 
measures,  and  was,  of  course,  biassed  in  favour  of 
the  pagans,  we  easily  understand,  and  also  excuse, 
because  Julian  was  a  man  working  to  achieve  a 
determined  aim,  and  it  was  evident  that,  in  his 
efforts  to  attain   this   aim,  he  was  occasionally 
induced  to  swerve  from  the  most  rigid  impartiality. 
But  this  cannot  be  called  persecution.  Persecution 
consists  in  the  seeking  out  and  punishing  adversaries 
simply  because  they  are  adversaries,  in  taking  the 
initiative  in  acts  tending  to  destroy  them,  in  using 
violence  as  a  natural  and  legitimate  weapon.  Of 
this  there  is  not  the  slightest  trace  in  Julian's 
conduct.    If  we  hear  of  a  few  rigorous  measures 
instituted  during  his  reign,  they  are  almost  always 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  327 

acts  of  prefects,  who  interpreted  after  their  own 
fashion  the  Emperor's  intentions,  and,  what  is 
still  more  important,  they  were  consequences  of 
tumults  and  disorders  of  which  the  Christians  were 
principally  guilty.  Thus,  admitting  that  there  was 
any  truth  in  the  account,  evidently  in  the  greater 
part  legendary,  related  by  Socrates,  concerning  the 
martyrdom  of  Theodulus  and  Tatian  by  order  of 
the  Prefect  of  the  province  of  Phrygia,  we  must 
recall  that  these  two,  inflamed  by  religious  zeal,  put 
themselves  at  the  head  of  a  Christian  insurrection 
and,  penetrating  into  the  interior  of  a  temple 
recently  reopened  in  the  city  of  Merus,  broke  to 
pieces  all  the  statues  of  the  gods.^  To  suppose 
that  Julian's  government  should  remain  impassive 
before  acts  of  this  kind,  and  to  call  it  a  persecution 
because  a  magistrate  naturally  punished  the  authors 
of  the  outrage,  is  worthy  of  wranglers,  but  not  of 
historians. 

Julian,  like  all  other  reformers,  was  under  the 
delusion  that  the  day  he  expressed  his  ideas  and 
inaugurated  a  new  era,  all  the  world  would  fall  at 
his  feet.  But,  instead,  when  he  came  into  power, 
he  encountered  an  unexpected  resistance,  and 
discovered  that  the  enterprise  was  much  more 
difficult  than  he  had  imagined.  From  this  arose 
a  perplexity  of  mind  and  a  feeling  of  irritation 
which,  during  the  latter  part  of  his  reign,  gave  an 
appearance  of  harshness  to  his  actions.   He  cannot, 

^  Socrat.,  op.  cit.^  153. 


328 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


however,  be  accused  of  having  abjured  those 
rational  principles  by  which  he  was  first  inspired, 
or  of  having  participated  in  the  blind  prejudice 
that  caused  the  cruel  and  senseless  persecutions  of 
the  preceding  emperors.  In  fact,  Julian's  modera- 
tion, as  we  have  observed,  is  explicitly  recognised 
by  Socrates,  who  says  that  Julian,  having  seen  how 
much  the  victims  of  Diocletian's  persecution  were 
honoured  by  the  Christians,  and  how  their  example 
incited  others  to  martyrdom,  decided  to  pursue 
another  course.  He  put  aside  the  cruelties  of 
Diocletian,  but  not  for  this  did  he  abstain  from 
persecution,  because,  Socrates  adds,  "  I  call  perse- 
cution that  which  in  any  way  disturbs  quiet  folk."^ 

Now,  according  to  Socrates,  Julian's  mode  of 
disturbing  quiet  people  and  exercising  his  persecu- 
tion, was  the  famous  prohibition  that  prevented 
the  Christians  from  teaching  Greek  literature 
(of  which  we  shall  speak  later),  his  objection  to 
having  Christian  soldiers  around  his  person  in  the 
Imperial  palace,  his  refusal  to  entrust  to  Christians 
the  government  of  the  provinces,  his  seeking  to 
persuade  the  wavering  Christians,  by  means  of 
gifts  and  blandishments,  to  return  to  the  worship 
of  the  gods,  and,  finally,  the  manner  by  which  he 
procured  a  war  fund  for  his  Persian  expedition, 
i.e.,  from  fines  inflicted  on  those  Christians  who 
refused  to  be  converted.    Of  these  acts  of  persecu- 

*  Socrat.,  op.  cit.^  153.  Siwyyxoi/  hi  Xiyoa  oTrwaovv  rapamiv  rovs 
rjavxaCovTas. 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  329 


tion,  it  is  clear  that  only  the  last  could  be  considered 
reprehensible,  although  far  removed  from  the 
habitual  atrocities  of  those  emperors  who  had 
really  resorted  to  persecution.  But  of  the  aforesaid 
tyrannical  measure  we  have  no  contemporaneous 
proof,  not  even  an  allusion  to  it  either  in 
Libanius,  in  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  or  in  the 
works  of  Julian  himself.  That  there  might  have 
been  some  acts  of  excessive  taxation  is  most 
probable,  but  a  regular  and  decided  law,  that  placed 
the  Christians  under  a  difficult  financial  condition, 
only  existed  in  the  imagination  of  the  historians 
who  came  after. 

Sozomenes,  as  usual,  enhances  and  intensifies 
the  legendary  colouring  in  the  narration  of  Socrates, 
from  whom  he  obtains  his  information.  The  scenes 
of  martyrdom  he  relates,  even  if  they  were  true, 
could  not  be  attributed  to  the  responsibility  of  the 
Emperor,  without  making  Socrates  and  Gregory 
contradict  themselves,  as  they  both  recognise  the 
tolerance  of  Julian,  although,  of  course,  attributing 
it  to  base  motives.  We  find  in  Sozomenes  an 
interesting  account  of  the  abolition  of  the  privileges 
enjoyed  by  the  Christian  clergy — an  abolition  that 
certainly  must  have  been  considered  as  a  most 
bitter  persecution.  Julian  deprived  them  of  the 
right  of  exemption  from  taxes,  and  also  of  the 
livings  with  which  they  had  been  invested  by 
Constantine  and  Constantius,  and  obliged  them  to 
re-enter,  if  called,  into  the  Communal  Councils,  which 


330 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


was  always  considered  a  heavy  grievance,  because 
of  the  individual  responsibility  of  the  councillors  in 
the  payment  of  taxes  and  municipal  expenses — a 
burden  from  which  all  citizens  anxiously  sought  to 
escape.  This  administrative  persecution  is  much 
deplored  by  Sozomenes  as  being  little  less  severe 
than  the  cruelties  practised  by  the  former  emperors. 
But  impartial  historians  must  recognise  that  the 
least  Julian  could  require  in  the  moment  in  which 
he  was  so  anxious  to  restore  paganism  was 
to  deprive  the  Christians  of  the  special  rights 
they  enjoyed,  and  place  all  citizens,  whatever 
their  religion  might  be,  on  a  footing  of  absolute 
equality/ 

The  tolerance  of  Julian  is  demonstrated  and 
commented  on  by  Libanius  in  his  Necrological 
Discourse  in  a  manner  that  leaves  no  doubt  that, 
for  the  Emperor,  it  really  constituted  a  fundamental 
principle  of  conduct.  After  narrating  that  Julian 
rendered  the  customary  honours  to  the  body  of  his 
enemy  Constantius,  Libanius  says  that  he  inaugur- 
ated the  worship  of  the  gods,  "rejoicing  over  those 
who  followed  him,  contemptuous  towards  his  op- 
ponents, striving  to  persuade  (them),  but  never 
allowing  himself  to  stoop  to  acts  of  violence."^ 
"Nevertheless,"  continues  Libanius,  "he  did  not 
lack  inducements  to  renew  the  bloody  persecutions 
of  other  times  "  ;  but  Julian  stood  firm,  convinced  that 

1  Sozom.,  op.  cit.^  488.  -  Liban,,  op.  cit.^  i.  562,  10. 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  331 


"  it  is  not  through  fire  and  sword  that  he  could 
impose  renunciation  of  a  false  conception  of  the 
gods,  since  even  if  the  hand  sacrifices,  the  con- 
science reproves  [kuv  t)  ^elp  6vr),  fxificperat  77  yvco/XTj),  and 
there  is  therefore  a  shadow  of  a  conversion,  and  not 
a  change  of  opinion  (ecrrt  aKLaypacpia  rt?  fiera^oXTjf;  ou 
fierdaTao-L^  8o|7??).  And  then  it  happens  that  these, 
later  on,  obtain  pardon,  while  those  who  are  killed  are 
honoured  as  if  they  were  gods.  Being  convinced 
of  all  this,  and  seeing  that  through  persecution  the 
cause  of  the  Christians  has  benefited,  he  abstained 
from  it.  "Those  who  loved  virtue,  he  led  to  the 
truth,  but  he  used  no  violence  against  those  who 
loved  evil.-^  .  .  .  He  loved  to  visit  the  cities  in 
which  the  temples  had  been  preserved,  and  he  con- 
sidered them  deserving  his  favour ;  those  which 
wholly  or  in  part  had  become  alienated  from  the 
worship  of  the  gods  he  held  as  impure,  but  gave 
them,  as  his  other  subjects,  that  which  they  needed, 
but  certainly  not  without  displeasure." 

According  to  the  opinion  of  Ammianus,  Julian 
only  committed  one  act  of  excessive  rigour  during 
the  whole  of  his  career  :  once  only  he  gave  full  vent 
to  the  hatred  that  had  accumulated  in  his  heart. 
Entering  Constantinople,  he  found  the  Imperial 
palace  full  of  the  courtiers  of  Constantius.  They 
formed  a  class  which  had  become  opulent  from  the 
spoils  of  the  temples,  and  with  every  variety  of 
abuses,  and  gave  a  frightful  example  of  corruption, 

^  Liban.,  op.  a'/.,  i.  562,  23  sq.  ^  /^/^.^  op.  cit,  1.  565,  3. 


332 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


luxury,  and  vice/  Julian  expelled  them  with  a 
violence  that,  according  to  the  honest  Ammianus, 
deprived  him  of  all  serenity  of  judgment  and  possi- 
bility of  discrimination.  But,  amongst  these,  Julian 
found  the  hiorh  officials  and  counsellors  of  Con- 
stantius  ;  above  all,  that  despicable  eunuch, 
Eusebius,  who  had  instigated  the  assassination  of 
Gallus,  and  was  the  most  implacable  enemy  he  had 
near  his  cousin.  Julian  was  unable  to  overcome  his 
desire  for  vengeance,  and  instituted  a  Commission  of 
Inquiry  and  Judgment,  to  whose  decision  they  were 
referred,  and  this  body,  believing  that  they  were 
carrying  out  the  intentions  of  the  Emperor,  treated 
the  accused  with  the  greatest  cruelty,  and  stained 
with  blood,  not  always  justly  shed,  the  beginning 
of  his  reign.2 

The  Court  of  Constantius  was  entirely  composed 
of  Christians,  because  Constantius  was  a  bigoted 
Christian,  who  would  not  have  permitted  or  tolerated 
the  presence  of  a  courtier  still  faithful  to  the  ancient 
religion,  and  his  intimate  counsellors  were  Christians 
likewise,  and  it  was  upon  these  that  Julian  wreaked 
his  vengeance.  But  it  certainly  requires  the  blind 
partisanship  of  Gregory  to  insinuate  that  Julian,  in 
inflicting  these  condemnations,  was  prompted,  not 
so  much  by  hatred  of  the  courtiers  of  Constantius 
as  by  his  ire  against  the  Christians,  as  if  it  was 
possible  that  the  Emperor  would  initiate  a  bloody 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit..^  i.  269,  13. 
2  Ibid..,  op.  cit.^  i.  267,  7  sq. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  333 


persecution  precisely  at  the  moment  in  which  he 
called  the  Christians  to  his  Court,  inviting  them  to 
come  to  an  accord  among  themselves,  and  to  an- 
nounce to  them  the  full  and  secure  liberty  of  their 
worship.  That  the  courtiers  of  Constantius  were 
Christians,  and  that  from  this  circumstance  Julian 
found  another  reason  for  his  condemnation  of 
Christianity  is  clear  and  natural.  But  this  does 
not  alter  the  fact  that,  in  his  conduct,  he  was 
actuated  by  sentiments  in  which  religious  partisan- 
ship had  not  the  slightest  influence.  This  we  see 
most  clearly  in  a  letter  addressed  to  his  friend 
Hermogenes  at  the  very  moment  in  which  he 
nominated  the  Commission  of  Inquiry  :  Allow  me 
to  exclaim,  as  if  I  were  a  poetic  speaker — '  Oh !  I 
who  had  no  hopes  of  being  saved,  had  no  hope  of 
hearing  that  thou  hadst  escaped  from  the  three- 
headed  Hydra!' — By  Jove!  do  not  believe  that  I 
speak  of  Constantius !  That  man  was  what  he 
was.  I  would  speak  of  those  wild  beasts  who  were 
around  him,  who  spied  on  every  one,  and  rendered 
him  still  more  cruel ;  although,  no  doubt,  even  left 
alone,  he  was  by  no  means  merciful,  notwithstand- 
ing to  many  he  appeared  so.  But  for  him,  since 
he  is  dead,  may  the  earth  lie  lightly  on  him,  as  the 
saying  is.  As  to  the  others,  Jove  knows  that  I 
would  not  wish  them  to  suffer  unjustly.  But  as 
many  accusers  have  presented  themselves,  I  have 
instituted  a  tribunal.  Thou,  in  the  meantime,  my 
friend,  come,  and  try  and  arrive  as  soon  as  possible. 


334  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


For  a  long  time  I  have  prayed  the  gods  that  I 
might  see  thee,  and  now  that  thou  art  saved,  with 
the  greatest  joy  I  exhort  thee  to  come."^ 

And  in  another  letter,  which  we  have  already 
quoted  in  the  previous  chapter,  deploring  certain 
injustices  suffered  by  the  Jews,  Julian  throws  the 
responsibility  on  those  who,  "barbarous  in  their 
judgment,  impious  in  their  souls,  sat  at  his  table, 
and  whom  I,  taking  them  in  hand,  have  annihilated, 
hurling  them  to  Erebus,  so  that  I  should  no  longer 
be  obliged  to  be  annoyed  even  with  the  memory 
of  their  wickedness."^ 

It  is  therefore  indubitable  that  even  this,  the 
only  harsh  and  reprehensible  act  committed  by 
Julian,  could  not,  by  any  means,  be  considered  an 
instance  of  persecution.  Julian,  as  we  shall  see 
from  his  letters,  remained  faithful  to  the  principle 
he  proclaimed  at  the  inauguration  of  his  reign — the 
principle  of  religious  tolerance.  This  harmonised 
with  the  tendencies  of  his  calm  and  well-balanced 
mind,  to  which  all  violence  was  repugnant.  He 
loved  discussion  and  logical  debate,  and,  above  all, 
must  have  understood,  even  without  recalling  the 
recent  failure  of  Diocletian,  that  persecution  would 
necessarily  be  inefficacious  against  a  religion  already 
spread  over  more  than  half  the  empire.  But  we 
believe,  however,  that  Ammianus  Marcellinus  was 
clear-sighted  and  earnest  in  his  judgment  when  he 
attributed  a  part  of  Julian's  religious  tolerance  to  a 

1  Julian.,  op.  ciL,  503.  ^  /^/^.^  op.  cit.y  503,  10  sq. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  335 


calculation  of  skilful  opportunism.^  The  intestine 
discords  in  Christianity  were  a  powerful  leaven  of 
dissolution,  and  a  formidable  obstacle  to  the  forma- 
tion of  a  Church  whose  rule  might  be  accepted  with 
an  absolute  and  unquestioned  authority.  Tolerance 
was  a  virtue  which  Christianity  absolutely  ignored, 
a  virtue  that  was,  in  contradiction  with  its  essential 
tendencies,  a  virtue  that  it  considered  a  vice. 
Dogmatic  intolerance  was  a  phenomenon  new  to 
the  world  ;  it  was  the  necessary  consequence  of  the 
fact  that  around  the  monotheistic  nucleus  of  the 
new  faith  there  had  formed  a  complex  of  metaphy- 
sical doctrine  that  ended  by  becoming  an  integral 
part  of  the  religion,  as  if  it  were  a  manifestation  of 
divine  truth.  Because  of  this,  heresy  became  a 
crime,  internal  discussions  in  Christianity  could  not 
be  tolerated,  and  the  Christians  of  opposite  parties 
regarded,  hated,  and  fought  each  other  with  much 
greater  hatred  than  they  exhibited  towards  the 
pagans.  Now,  all  being  fair  in  war,  Julian  decided 
and  knew  how  to  take  advantage  of  this  condition 
of  affairs  to  weaken  his  enemy.  And  as  Arianism, 
by  its  alliance  with  Constantius,  had  become  most 
powerful,  being  in  fact  the  religion  of  the  State, 
and  had  persecuted  and  exiled  in  great  numbers 
the  bishops  of  the  Athanasian  party,  Julian  did 
not  hesitate  an  instant  as  to  publishing  a  decree 
permitting  the  exiles  to  return  to  their  homes,^  not 

^  Ammian.  Marcell.,  op.  cit.^  i,  271,  17  sq. 
^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  559,  18  sq. 


336 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


doubting,  and  with  reason,  that,  as  soon  as  the  two 
parties  were  again  in  contact,  their  anger  would  be 
rekindled  and  their  disputes  renewed.  In  this  lay 
the  great  danger  for  Christianity.  And  Julian  here 
exhibited  great  acuteness.  If  he  had  returned  vic- 
torious from  his  Persian  campaign  and  had  enjoyed 
a  long  reign,  Christianity,  left  to  itself,  and  consumed 
by  discord,  would  have  wasted  away,  or  perhaps 
entirely  transformed  itself.  Christianity,  Arian  as 
well  as  Athanasian,  at  that  moment  needed  the 
succour  of  the  Imperial  arm.  Christianity,  having 
departed  from  its  pure  origin,  could  only  exist  under 
the  condition  of  being  intolerant.  And  intolerance, 
to  be  efficacious,  requires  the  assistance  of  material 
force.  Julian's  premature  death  rendered  it  possible 
for  Ambrose,  a  few  years  later,  with  the  assistance 
of  Gratianus  and  Theodosius,  to  assign  the  final 
victory  to  Catholic  dogmatism. 

We  find  among  Julian's  friendly  and  confidential 
letters.  Imperial  decrees  and  manifestoes  that  furnish 
us  with  the  best  and  surest  means  of  discovering 
his  intentions  and  judging  his  actions  in  relation 
to  the  Christians.  That,  notwithstanding  his 
cordial  hatred  of  them,  Julian  decided  to  abstain 
from  any  violence  against  their  persons,  and  did 
not  hesitate  to  condemn  those  acts  which  took 
place  in  spite  of  his  orders,  and  in  consequence 
of  popular  outbursts  of  passion,  is  demonstrated  by 
most  explicit  documents.    To  Artabius  he  writes  : 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  337 

By  the  gods,  I  have  no  wish  that  the  GaHleans 
should  be  unjustly  murdered  or  maltreated,  or  that 
they  should  suffer  any  loss.  I  only  insist  that  the 
worshippers  of  the  gods  shall  be  held  in  the 
greatest  esteem,  since  the  stupidity  of  the  Galileans 
would  send  us  to  destruction,  if  we  were  not  saved 
therefrom  by  the  mercy  of  the  gods."^  And  in  a 
manifesto  directed  to  the  inhabitants  of  Bostra,  on 
the  occasion  of  threatened  riots  between  Christians 
and  pagans,  he  concludes  :  Agree  among  your- 
selves, and  let  no  one  commit  violence  or  injustice. 
The  misguided  should  not  offend  those  who  adore 
the  gods  loyally  and  justly,  according  to  the  law 
given  us  from  all  eternity,  and  the  worshippers 
of  the  gods,  on  their  side,  should  not  assail  the 
dwellings  of  those  who  sin  more  from  ignorance 
than  conviction.  We  must  persuade  and  instruct 
men  by  means  of  reason,  not  with  blows  or  violence, 
or  by  tormenting  the  body.  Now,  as  in  times 
past,  I  exhort  all  those  who  follow  the  teachings 
of  true  piety  not  to  do  any  hurt  to  the  crowd  of 
the  Galileans,  not  to  insult  them,  and  not  to  attack 
them  violently.  We  should  not  hate  but  com- 
passionate those  who  act  perversely  in  matters  of 
supreme  importance ;  because  the  greatest  good 
is  piety,  and  impiety  the  greatest  evil.  Those  who, 
abandoning  the  worship  of  the  gods,  have  given 
themselves  up  to  the  adoration  of  the  dead  and 
relics  will  find  their  punishment  in  themselves. 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  485,  14  sq. 

VOL.  II.  —  2 


338  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


We  should  pity  them,  as  we  pity  those  who  are 
afflicted  with  some  disease,  and  we  should  rejoice 
over  those  who  have  been  liberated  and  saved  by 
the  gods."  ^ 

It  would,  certainly,  be  impossible  to  be  more 
explicit,  more  reasonable  and  temperate,  and,  we 
may  also  say,  more  modern  than  Julian,  in  this 
declaration ;  more  modern,  because  the  principle 
of  religious  tolerance,  promulgated  by  the  restorer 
of  polytheism,  could  not  be  renewed  except  by  the 
downfall  of  dogmatic  infallibility.  But  Julian  must 
have  found  some  difficulty  in  fully  applying  this 
principle  in  the  midst  of  the  inflamed  passions  of 
the  people.  The  Christians  having  become,  after 
Constantine,  the  masters  of  the  situation,  in  their 
turn,  acted  as  persecutors,  and  destroyed  and  sacked 
in  many  places  the  ancient  temples.  It  was,  there- 
fore, inevitable  that  when  the  pagans  returned  to 
power  they  should  desire  to  make  reprisals.  But 
the  situation,  then  already  sufficiently  complicated, 
became  even  more  difficult  on  account  of  the 
internal  discords  among  the  Christians — discords, 
which,  as  we  have  observed,  were  advantageous  to 
Julian,  but  which  he  could  not  possibly  countenance 
without  wounding  that  principle  of  obedience  and 
reciprocal  respect  which  formed  the  basis  of  his 
religious  policy.  We  shall  see  how  Julian  got  over 
the  difficulty,  by  examining  his  conduct  in  the  epi- 
sode of  the  murder  of  George,  Bishop  of  Alexandria. 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  562,  5  sq. 


JULIAVS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  339 


During  the  reign  of  Constantius,  Artemius,  his 
trusty  counsellor,  was  the  Governor  of  Alexandria, 
and  the  Arian  George  was  Bishop.  These  two 
men,  because  of  the  tyranny  of  their  government 
and  their  accusations  to  the  suspicious  Emperor, 
were  detested  by  the  population  of  Alexandria — 
a  city  that,  according  to  Ammianus  Marcellinus, 
the  faithful  narrator  of  this  episode,^  was  always 
ready  to  riot  as  soon  as  an  occasion  presented 
itself.  On  Julian's  accession,  he  ordered  Artemius 
to  be  brought  to  Constantinople,  where,  being  found 
guilty  of  great  crimes,  he  was  condemned  to  death. 
The  Alexandrians,  who,  for  some  time,  lived  in  fear 
of  Artemius'  possible  return  and  a  repetition  of  his 
arbitrary  cruelties,  on  receiving  the  news  of  his 
death,  rose  up  against  Bishop  George,  who  was 
especially  odious  to  the  pagan  part  of  the  popula- 
tion of  Alexandria,  because  he  incited  the  Christians 
to  the  destruction  of  the  temples.  George  and  his 
two  companions  in  faith  and  intrigue,  Dracontius 
and  Deodorus,  were  ruthlessly  massacred  by  the 
infuriated  mob.  And  fearing  that  their  tombs 
might  become  sacred  places,  like  those  of  the 
martyrs,  their  bodies  were  burnt,  and  their  ashes 
thrown  into  the  sea.  Ammianus  observes  that  if 
the  Christians  had  so  willed  they  could  have 
averted  the  catastrophe,  but  that,  instead,  they 
remained  indifferent  spectators.  Probably  these 
indifferent    Christians    were     the    partisans  of 

^  Amm.  Marcell,  op.  cit.^  i.  289,  28  sq. 


340 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Athanasius,  to  whom  the  death  of  the  Arian 
George  was  by  no  means  unwelcome. 

JuHan,  who  reunited,  in  a  common  hatred  and 
under  the  contemptuous  name  of  GaHleans,  Arians 
and  Athanasians,  could  not,  from  his  point  of  view, 
as  restorer  of  paganism,  have  been  displeased  by 
such  a  decided  proof  of  zeal  on  the  part  of  the 
Alexandrians.  But  he  was  Emperor,  and  aspired 
to  be  a  just  and  impartial  ruler,  so  he  could  not 
possibly  allow  this  crime  to  pass  unpunished.  And 
Ammianus  relates  that  he  had  decided  to  inflict 
the  merited  chastisement,  but  the  friends  who 
surrounded  him  being,  as  always  happens,  more 
Imperialist  than  the  Emperor,  persuaded  Julian 
to  content  himself  with  sending  an  edict  of  reproof 
to  the  Alexandrians,  so  that,  to  all  intents  and 
purposes,  they  remained  unpunished.  This  edict, 
preserved  in  its  entirety,  is  of  great  interest  on 
account  of  the  insight  it  gives  into  Julian's  character 
and  his  method  of  governing. 


*'The  Emperor  C^sar  Julian  Maximus 
Augustus  to  the  People  of  Alexandrlv 

Even  if  you  do  not  respect  your  founder, 
Alexander,  and,  still  more,  the  great  and  most  holy 
god  Serapis,  how  is  it  possible,  I  ask  of  you,  that 
you  forget  to  consider  your  duty  towards  the 
Empire  and  towards  humanity?  And  I  will  also 
add  the  thought  of  us,  whom  all  the  gods,  and 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  ?>41 


the  great  Serapis  especially,  considered  worthy  to 
govern  the  earth — of  us  who  had  the  right  of 
instituting  proceedings  against  those  who  had 
offended  you  ?  But,  perhaps,  you  were  deluded  by 
anger  and  passion,  which  is  always  dangerous  and 
disturbing  to  the  judgment,  so  that,  notwithstanding 
your  impulse,  which,  in  the  beginning,  had  rightly 
counselled  you,  you  were  induced  to  transgress 
the  law,  and  shamelessly  to  commit,  as  a  body, 
those  crimes  you  so  justly  condemned  in  others. 

''In  the  name  of  Serapis,  tell  me,  on 
what  account  did  you  become  infuriated  against 
George  ?  You  will  certainly  reply  that  he  incited 
Constantius  against  you,  and  introduced  an  army 
into  the  sacred  city,  and  induced  the  Governor  of 
Egypt  to  seize  the  most  venerated  temple  of  the 
god,  violating  the  images,  the  votive  offerings,  and 
the  sacred  ornaments.  Against  you,  naturally 
burning  with  indignation  and  attempting  to  defend 
the  god,  or  rather,  we  should  say,  the  property  of 
the  god,  the  Governor  iniquitously,  illegally,  and 
impiously  sent  his  soldiers,  fearing  more  than 
Constantius,  George,  who  watched  him  to  see 
how  he  behaved,  not  out  of  fear  lest  he  might  be 
tyrannical,  but  rather  that  he  might  treat  you  with 
temperance  and  civility.  Thereupon,  enraged 
against  this  George,  who  was  an  enemy  of  the 
gods,  you  have  defiled  the  sacred  city,  when, 
instead,  you  might  have  consigned  him  to  the 
judgment  of  the  magistrates.      And  thus  there 


842 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


would  have  been  neither  murder  nor  crime,  only- 
perfect  justice,  that  would  have  protected  you,  the 
innocent  ones,  and  punished  this  sacrilegious  wretch, 
and  at  the  same  time  given  a  lesson  to  others, 
however  numerous  they  may  be,  who  do  not  respect 
the  gods,  have  no  regard  for  cities  such  as  yours 
and  for  prosperous  populations,  and  consider  cruelty 
as  a  necessary  adjunct  to  power.  Compare  this 
letter  with  the  last  I  sent  you  some  time  ago,  and 
note  the  difference !  What  praise  did  I  render 
you !  And  even  now  I  would  like  to  praise  you, 
but  cannot  because  of  your  transgressions.  Your 
citizens  have  dared,  like  dogs,  to  tear  in  pieces  a 
man,  and  after  that  they  were  not  ashamed  to 
uplift  their  blood  -  stained  hands  unto  the  gods. 
But  George,  you  say,  deserved  this  punishment. 
Certainly,  I  reply,  and  one  even  more  severe 
and  harsh.  Because  of  his  actions  against  you, 
you  will  say.  I  admit  it.  But  if  you  say  by 
your  hands,  I  will  reply,  no,  since  there  are  laws 
that  each  one  of  you  should  respect  and  love. 
And  if  it  so  happen  that  some  one  transgresses 
them,  the  majority  of  you  should  follow  and  obey 
them,  and  not  turn  away  from  that  which,  from 
ancient  times,  has  been  providentially  instituted. 
It  is  lucky  for  you,  O  Alexandrians,  that  you  have 
committed  this  crime  under  my  government, 
because,  out  of  respect  for  the  divinity  and  regard 
for  my  uncle  and  namesake,  who  governed  Egypt 
and  your   city,   I    feel    towards  you  a  fraternal 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  343 


benevolence.  But  a  pure  and  rigorous  government 
would  have  treated  the  culpable  audacity  of  your 
citizens  as  a  grave  illness  which  must  be  cured  by  a 
drastic  medicine.  However,  in  place  of  this,  I  will 
offer  you,  for  the  reasons  stated  above,  that  which 
will  be  more  acceptable  to  you,  exhortation  and 
reasoning,  by  which  I  feel  assured  you  will  be 
persuaded,  if  you  are,  as  you  are  said  to  be,  Greeks 
of  the  old  stock,  and  if  there  remain  traces  of  that 
admirable  and  noble  origin  in  your  souls  and 
customs. 

This   is   to   be   notified  to  my  citizens  of 
Alexandria."  ^ 

When  we  consider  that  this  edict  was  written 
by  the  most  decided  enemy  Christianity  ever  had, 
it  is  impossible  not  to  pronounce  it  an  example 
of  moderation  and  self-restraint.  Bishop  George 
must  have  been  doubly  odious  to  Julian,  as  an 
intolerant  Christian,  and  as  the  friend  and  confidant 
of  Constantius.  The  insurrection  of  Alexandria 
might,  therefore,  have  been  considered  by  him  as  a 
proof  of  zeal  and  devotion,  as  the  most  solemn 
demonstration  of  the  favour  with  which  the  restora- 
tion he  had  initiated  had  been  received  in  the 
capital  of  Eastern  commerce  and  thought.  But 
Julian,  true  to  his  programme,  does  not  allow  either 
bloodshed,  violence,  or  disorder.  He,  certainly, 
does  not  allow  the  violence  of  the  Christians  who 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  488. 


344 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


rushed  to  persecute  those  who  did  not  believe  as 
they  believed,  but  neither  did  he  countenance  the 
violence  of  the  pagans  when  attempting  to  take  the 
law  into  their  own  hands.  His  programme  was  one 
of  reciprocal  tolerance,  and  he  was  still  under  the 
delusion  that  paganism  had  in  itself  such  a  power  of 
attraction  that,  on  its  return  to  liberty  of  action  and 
natural  development,  it  might  still  attract  to  its 
folds  the  crowds  that  had  strayed  away. 

But  it  was  not  easy  to  exercise  tolerance  in 
the  midst  of  excited  passions.  The  example  of 
the  Alexandrians  was  followed,  according  to 
Sozomenes,^  by  other  cities  of  Syria,  in  Gaza,  in 
Arethusa,  where  scenes  of  bloodshed  and  violence 
took  place,  promoted  by  the  pagans  to  revenge 
themselves  on  the  Christians,  while,  in  other  parts, 
the  Christians,  who  were  not  alarmed,  but  rather, 
as  it  appears,  very  much  irritated  by  this  un- 
expected restoration  of  paganism,  devoted  them- 
selves, with  renewed  energy,  to  the  destruction  of 
the  temples.  The  most  serious  tumults  were  those 
of  Csesarea-Mazaca,  in  Cappadocia,  where  the 
population,  in  great  majority  Christian,  after  having 
demolished  the  temples  of  Jupiter  and  of  Apollo, 
destroyed,  when  Julian  was  Emperor,  the  temple 
of  Fortune.^  The  Emperor  replied  to  this  act  of 
defiance  with  a  chastisement  decidedly  severe,  but 
of  a  purely  administrative  character.    He  removed 

1  Sozom.,  op.  cit.,  492  sq. 

2  Il?id.,  op.  cif.^  487. — Greg.  Naz.,  op.  cif.,  91. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  345 


from  office  the  Prefect  of  Cappadocia,  confiscated 
the  property  of  the  Christian  churches,  imposed  a 
heavy  fine,  and  deprived  the  town  of  its  privi- 
leges. But  it  would  be  unjust  to  consider  these 
proceedings  as  acts  of  persecution.  Taking  into 
consideration  the  principle  he  had  imposed  upon 
himself,  Julian  could  leave  his  enemies  in  peace, 
but  he  could  not,  with  impunity,  permit  them  to 
rebel  against  him,  and  offend  him  in  that  which 
was  nearest  and  dearest  to  his  heart. 

Those  who,  for  these  acts  of  defence,  accuse 
Julian  of  violence  and  persecution,  forget  that  as 
soon  as  the  Christians,  with  the  help  of  Constantine, 
obtained  the  victory,  they,  in  their  turn,  became 
persecutors,  not  being  able  to  withstand  the 
influence  and  customs  of  the  time.  As  an  example 
of  the  intolerance  of  the  first  Christian  emperors, 
we  have  only  to  consult  the  decree  of  Constantius 
and  Constans,  promulgated  in  the  year  353.  We 
decree  that  in  every  place  and  every  city  the 
temples  be  closed,  that  no  one  be  allowed  to 
enter  them,  and  that  the  liberty  of  doing  evil  be 
denied  to  the  impious.  We  command  that  every 
one  abstain  from  offering  sacrifice.  If  any  one  per- 
petrates anything  of  the  kind,  he  is  to  be  slaughtered 
with  the  avenging  sword.  We  decree  that  the 
property  of  the  condemned  be  assigned  to  the 
public  treasury,  and  we  order  that  the  governors  of 
provinces,  who  might  be  negligent  in  repressing 


346 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


these  crimes,  be  also  severely  punished."  ^  Certainly 
neither  Decius  nor  Diocletian  would  have  acted  any 
better.  But  the  most  interesting  document,  as 
giving  us  an  account  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
Christians  oppressed  the  pagans,  is  the  discourse 
of  Libanius  About  Temples,"  directed  by  him  to 
the  Emperor  Theodosius.  Although  this  discourse 
was  written  some  years  after  the  reign  of  Julian,  it 
depicts  a  condition  of  things  that  had  existed  for 
a  long  time,  and  is  symptomatic  of  the  animus 
displayed  in  the  conflict  between  the  two  still 
rival  religions.  This  is  the  origin  of  the 
discourse.  The  Emperor  Theodosius,  with  many 
decrees,  and  especially  with  one  directed  to 
Cinegius,  Prefect  of  the  East  in  385,  confirmed 
the  enactments  of  the  preceding  emperors  which 
forbade  sacrifices.  He  tolerated,  however,  the 
continuation  of  such  other  rites  as  perfuming  with 
incense  and  offering  prayer,  and  did  not  order,  or 
even  encourage,  the  destruction  of  the  temples. 
But  the  Christians  seem  to  have  found  sufficient 
encouragement  in  the  logic  of  things,  and,  there- 
fore, without  waiting  for  Imperial  laws  and  orders, 
they  devoted  themselves  to  the  work  of  overturning 
the  temples,  among  which  were  some  of  the  most 
beautiful  monuments,  concealing,  under  an  appear- 
ance of  religious  fanaticism,  private  interest  and 

^  See  together  with  this  one,  the  laws  of  the  Codex  Theodosianus^ 
under  the  title  of  "  De  paganis,  sacrificiis  et  templis."  See  also 
Liban.,  op.  cit.^  ii.  148. 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  347 


avidity  of  gain.  Against  this  abuse  Libanius  raised 
his  voice  in  a  discourse,  adch'essed  by  him  to  the 
Emperor,  the  date  of  which  must  be  ascribed  to  the 
years  between  385  and  391.^ 

From  this  discourse  we  find  proof  of  the 
degradation  and  moral  corruption  into  which 
Christianity  had  been  plunged  as  soon  as  it 
became  powerful.  This  impression  that  we  have 
gained  from  all  contemporary  documents  is 
strongly  confirmed  by  the  discourse  of  Libanius. 
That  he  could  address  himself  to  an  Emperor  of 
Christian  faith — and  such  an  Emperor! — thus  ac- 
cusing implicitly  the  Christians  and,  more  especially, 
the  clergy  and  the  monks,  of  every  kind  of  violence, 
because  of  their  thirst  for  lucre,  forces  us  to  admit 
that  the  truth  of  the  accusation,  at  least  in  part, 
was  so  thoroughly  clear  that  no  one  could  run 
any  risk  from  exposing  it.  We  see  in  Libanius 
how  polytheism  retired  from  the  cities  into  the 
country,  where  it  was  jealously  preserved  by  the 
peasants,  by  the  agriculturists,  who,  with  the 
tenacity  of  simple-minded  people  living  far  from 
the  social  turmoil,  practised  the  old  ceremonies, 
and  appealed  to  their  accustomed  and  beloved 
divinities  to  protect  their  work.  It  is  especially 
against  those  that  the  violence  of  the  Christian 
clergy  was  exercised,  as  those  priests  enriched 
themselves  by  the  spoliations  effected  in  the  name 
of  a  divine  principle.    These  revelations  are  most 

^  Liban.,  op.  dt.^  ii.  153- 


348  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


valuable.  Rightly  to  understand  such  a  movement 
as  that  of  Julian  we  must  bear  in  mind  that 
Christianity,  having  lost  its  characteristic  of 
retributive  justice  and  sublime  heroism,  had  abased 
itself  to  the  level  of  its  surroundinors,  and  had 
become  a  religion  in  whose  protecting  shadow 
germinated  all  those  passions  and  vices  which  it 
ought  to  have  radically  destroyed,  if  it  had 
thoroughly  regenerated  society. 

We  will  choose  a  few  examples  from  the 
mass  of  accusations  and  sneers  which  Libanius 
offers  us.  "Thou" — he  says,  addressing  himself 
to  Theodosius — thou  hast  not  ordered  that  the 
temples  should  be  closed,  or  that  no  one  should 
enter  them,  or  that  fire  and  incense  and  the 
honour  of  other  perfumes  should  be  removed  from 
the  altars.  But  that  crew,  wearing  black  clothes, 
who  eat  more  than  elephants,  and  who,  because  of 
their  repeated  drinking-bouts,  give  a  great  deal  of 
work  to  those  who  serve  them  with  wine  when  they 
sing,  and  conceal  all  this  under  an  artificial  pallor, — 
they,  O  Emperor,  in  defiance  of  the  law,  rush  to  the 
temples,  some  bearing  clubs  and  stones  and  irons, 
and  others,  without  these,  bent  on  using  their  feet 
and  their  hands.  Then  they  pull  down  the  roofs, 
sap  the  walls,  wrench  the  statues  from  their  places, 
and  hack  the  altars  to  pieces.  And  the  priests 
must  keep  silent,  or  die.  Having  destroyed  one 
temple,  they  go  on  to  the  second,  and  then  to  the 
third,  in  spite  of  the  law,  accumulating  trophies 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  349 


after  trophies.  This  is  done  in  the  cities,  but 
much  more  in  the  country.  .  .  .  There  they  pass 
Hke  a  torrent,  leaving  devastation  in  their  wake, 
under  the  pretext  of  destroying  the  temples.  And 
when  in  a  field  they  have  laid  low  its  temple,  they 
have  also  extinguished  and  murdered  its  soul ; 
because,  O  Emperor,  the  temples  are  the  souls 
of  the  fields,  and  they  were  the  first  nucleus  of 
buildings  that  have  increased  through  many 
generations  to  their  present  state.  In  the  temples 
are  centred  all  the  hopes  of  the  agriculturists  for 
the  prosperity  of  men,  women,  children,  and  cattle, 
of  sowing  and  of  reaping.  A  field  that  has  suffered 
this  damage  is  ruined,  and  has  lost,  together  with 
all  hopes,  the  confidence  of  the  labourers.  They 
believe  their  work  useless  when  they  are  deprived 
of  the  gods  who  cause  it  to  be  fruitful.  ...  So 
the  audacity  of  this  crew,  so  maliciously  exercised 
in  the  country,  leads  to  the  most  deplorable  results. 
They  say  that  they  are  making  war  on  the  temples  ; 
but  the  war  resolves  itself  into  robbery,  in  snatching 
away  from  the  poor  that  which  belongs  to  them — 
their  provisions,  the  fruits  of  the  soil,  their  nutriment ; 
and  when  they  leave,  they  take  away,  as  if  they 
were  victors,  the  spoils  of  the  vanquished.  And 
this  is  not  enough  ;  they  appropriate  the  land  of 
any  poor  unfortunate  creature,  saying  it  is  sacred 
ground,  and  thus  many,  under  these  false  pretences, 
are  deprived  of  their  paternal  heritage.  It  is  these 
men  who,  pretending,  as  they  say,  to  serve  their 


350 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


god  with  fasting,  feast  on  the  misery  of  others. 
And  if  the  poor  victims,  going  to  the  city,  com- 
plain to  the  '  Shepherd '  (so  they  call  a  man 
who  is  anything  but  good),  and  expose  their 
sufferings,  the  *  Shepherd '  praises  the  offenders  and 
sends  away  the  offended,  saying  that  they  must 
consider  themselves  lucky  not  to  have  suffered 
more.  Nevertheless,  O  Emperor,  even  these 
unhappy  ones  are  in  the  number  of  thy  subjects, 
and  are  more  useful  than  their  oppressors,  as  the 
labourers  are  than  those  who  do  nothing.  The 
first  are  like  the  bees,  the  others  like  the  drones. 
As  soon  as  they  find  out  that  some  one  possesses 
a  little  field  of  which  they  could  despoil  him,  they 
immediately  affirm  that  this  one  sacrifices  to  the 
gods  and  commits  unlawful  acts,  and  that  they  must 
treat  him  with  violence,  and  here  the  *  moralists ' 
(6t  (TCD(f)povL<TTaL)  enter  upon  the  scene,  as  this  is  the 
name  now  given  to  thieves — if  I  do  not  say  too 
little,  for  thieves  seek  to  conceal  and  to  deny  that 
which  they  have  dared  to  do,  and  feel  offended 
when  they  are  called  thieves.  But  these,  instead, 
boast  of  what  they  have  done,  and  tell  it  to  those 
who  are  ignorant  of  it,  and  affirm  it  to  be  worthy 
of  praise.  .  .  .  And  why,  O  Emperor,  dost  thou 
bring  together  so  many  troops,  and  prepare 
arms,  and  call  thy  generals  to  council,  and  send 
them  where  the  need  is  greatest,  and  to  these  thou 
writest,  and  to  those  thou  respondest  ?  And  why 
these  new  walls  and  all  this  summer  work  .-^  To 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  351 


what  purpose,  to  what  end  is  this  to  the  cities  and 
the  country  ?  To  Hve  without  fear,  to  repose 
tranquilly,  not  to  be  disturbed  by  the  threats 
of  enemies,  and  to  be  certain  that  if  any  one 
comes  suddenly  upon  us,  they  will  be  driven  away, 
after  having  suffered  more  damage  than  they 
inflicted.  And  therefore,  if  while  thou  art  keeping 
in  check  the  enemy  from  without,  certain  of  thy 
subjects  maltreat  others  who  are  also  thy  subjects, 
and  refuse  to  permit  them  to  enjoy  the  happiness 
common  to  all,  is  it  not  true  that  they  offend  thy 
foresight,  thy  wisdom,  and  thy  administration?  Is 
it  not  true  that  by  their  actions  they  wage  war 
against  thy  will  ?  "  ^ 

In  this  appeal,  in  which  sarcasm  is  united  to 
invective  and  reasoning,  Libanius  appears  truly 
eloquent  and  of  great  ability.  And  we  recognise 
in  the  words  of  the  orator  an  accent  of  truth,  a 

^Liban.,  op.  cit.^  ii.  164,  2  sq.  It  is  interesting  to  see  that 
Libanius'  judgment  concerning  the  rapacious  actions  of  the  clergy 
and  of  the  monks  talHes  fully  with  that  of  Zosimus,  who  says  that 
"  these  under  the  pretext  of  giving  all  to  the  poor,  have  impoverished 
all"  (Zos.,  op.  cif.,  449).  Who  were  the  acocppovlo-Tai  is  clear 
from  a  law  of  Theodosius  of  the  year  392.  They  are  those 
"defensores"  and  "curiales"  to  whom  the  Emperor  delegated  the 
duty  of  watching  that  his  interdict  against  all  pagan  worship 
was  observed,  and  that  the  transgressors  were  referred  to  the 
judges.  The  discourse  of  Libanius  had  no  effect  ;  in  fact,  it  had  a 
result  entirely  opposite  to  that  which  he  had  expected.  For  while, 
from  his  discourse,  it  appears  that,  although  the  sacrifices  were 
forbidden,  the  rite  of  incense  was  still  permitted,  by  the  law  of  392, 
enacted  after  this  discourse,  it  was  explicitly  forbidden,  with  the 
threat  of  confiscation  of  all  places  where  the  incense  had  been 
burnt — "  omnia  loca  quae  turis  consisterit  vapore  fumasse  fisco  nostro 
adsocianda  censemus." 


352 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


sentiment  of  righteous  indignation,  and  the  despair- 
ing cry  of  the  vanquished,  unjustly  trampled  upon. 
The  passions  of  men  never  change.  When  they 
achieved  victory,  the  Christians  followed  the 
example  of  those  who  had  formerly  been  their 
masters,  and  they  revived,  in  the  name  of  a  new 
principle,  those  proceedings  and  excesses  which 
had  previously  been  committed  in  the  name  of 
an  opposite  principle.  And  Libanius,  being  a 
persecuted  pagan,  energetically  resists  the  argu- 
ments that  the  Christian  persecutors  presented  in 
defence  of  their  violence,  ix.,  that  by  these  means 
they  forced  the  pagans  to  become  converted. 
With  such  proceedings,  says  Libanius,  one  only 
obtains  shadows  of  conversions.  And  then,  ex- 
claims Libanius,  what  advantage  would  accrue  to 
the  Christians,  if  the  newly  converted  are  only 
such  in  words  and  not  in  deeds?  ''In  these 
matters  it  is  necessary  to  persuade,  not  to  con- 
strain. Those  who,  failing  to  persuade,  use 
violence,  may  believe  that  they  have  succeeded, 
but,  in  reality,  their  efforts  have  been  useless."^ 
The  cause  of  this  sad  condition  of  things  cannot, 
however,  be  attributed  to  Theodosius,  for  whom 
the  able  and  prudent  Libanius  has  only  words  of 
praise,  but  rather  to  his  perfidious  counsellors.  By 
this  Libanius  seems  to  indicate  Cinegius,  the  Pre- 
fect of  the  Orient,  and  the  husband  of  Acantia,  a 
matron  who  enjoyed  the  fame  of  sanctity.  "This 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  ii.  178. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  353 


deceiver,  a  man  impious,  and  an  enemy  of  the 
gods,  cruel,  avaricious,  and  fatal  to  the  earth 
that  bore  him,  possessing  an  immense  fortune 
which  he  misuses,  is  governed  by  his  wife,  to 
whom  he  defers  in  everything,  and  to  whom  all  is 
subordinate.  She,  in  her  turn,  is  obliged  to  obey 
those  who  dictate  to  her,  and  make  a  show  of 
virtue  by  clothing  themselves  in  mourning  garb, 
and  even,  for  greater  effect,  in  the  stuff  of  which 
weavers  make  sacks.  This  herd  of  scoundrels 
deceive,  cheat,  act  in  an  underhand  manner, 
and  tell  falsehoods."^  How  curious  this  little 
sketch  of  a  Prefect  of  the  East,  who  is  guided 
by  his  wife,  who,  in  her  turn,  is  ruled  by  monks ! 
And  how  strange  this  diversity  of  judgment  among 
men,  depending  entirely  on  the  colour  of  the 
lens  of  passion  through  which  the  objects  are 
viewed !  Libanius  sees  perfidy  and  ridicule 
where  a  Gregory  or  an  Athanasius  would  have 
seen  the  most  perfect  expression  of  holiness  in 
intention  and  action ! 

But  Theodosius,  Libanius  continues,  has  never 
issued  any  law  that  could  sanction  these  excesses. 
"  Thou  hast  never  imposed  this  yoke  on  the 
human  soul.  And  if  thou  believest  that  the 
worship  of  thy  God  is  preferable  to  the  worship 
of  others,  thou  hast  never  declared  that  the 
worship  of  others  than  thine  is  impious,  and  that 
it  is  just  to  prohibit  it."    On  the  contrary,  he 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  ii.  194,  10  sq. 

VOL.  II. — 3 


354  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


calls  to  him  as  counsellors  and  boon-companions 
men  notoriously  devoted  to  the  gods,  and  does 
not  mistrust  a  friend  because  he  has  put  his 
hope  in  these  gods.  And  recalling  Julian,  whose 
image  is  never  distant  from  his  thoughts,  Libanius 
exclaims  :  Thou  dost  not  persecute  us,  follow- 
ing the  example  of  him  who  defeated  the  Persians 
by  his  arms,  but,  with  these  arms,  never  persecuted 
those  of  his  subjects  who  were  inimical  to  him."  ^ 

During  Julian's  sojourn  in  Antioch,  an  incident 
occurred  that  most  particularly  irritated  him. 
Nothing  was  more  repugnant  to  him  than  the 
veneration  exhibited  by  the  Christians  for  the 
sepulchres  of  their  martyrs  and  illustrious  men. 
This  adoration  of  the  dead,  as  he  called  it,  offended 
his  aesthetic  sense  as  an  ancient  Greek,  seemed  to 
him  absurd,  and  probably  was  odious  to  him 
because  it  was  one  of  the  most  efficacious  means 
of  exalting  souls  to  a  high  pitch  of  devotional 
fervour.  Whenever  he  alluded  to  this  ''worship 
of  the  dead,"  his  remarks  were  replete  with 
sarcasm  and  contempt,  and,  even  more  than  the 
destruction  of  the  churches,  he  desired  the  dis- 
appearance or  the  abandonment  of  those  tombs 
which  had  become  sacred  spots.  Such  was  the 
tomb  of  the  martyr  Babylas,  in  the  suburb  of 
Daphne,  near  Antioch.  This  suburb  was  a  place 
of  delight  on  account  of  the  beauty  of  the  trees 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  ii.  202,  10  sq. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  355 


and  flowers,  for  its  view  and  its  balmy  breezes. 
The  legend  was  that,  in  this  spot,  the  nymph 
Daphne,  when  flying  from  Apollo,  was  changed 
into  a  bay  tree,  and  this  association,  added  to  the 
suggestive  beauty  of  the  surroundings,  made  the 
grove  of  Daphne  the  resort  of  lovers.  ''He  who 
walked  through  Daphne  " — writes  Sozomenes  ^ — 
without  being  accompanied  by  his  sweetheart, 
was  considered  a  stupid  and  uncouth  individual." 
And  in  the  midst  of  the  grove  was  the  finest- 
known  statue  of  Apollo,  and,  hard  by,  a  splendid 
marble  temple  dedicated  to  the  god. 

But  when  Gallus,  the  brother  of  Julian,  was 
named  Caesar  by  Constantius,  and  invested  with 
the  government  of  the  East,  he  established  him- 
self in  Antioch,  and,  being  a  fervent  Christian, 
was  struck  with  the  idea  of  destroying  the  prestige 
of  this  celebrated  sanctuary  of  Hellenism,  and,  in 
order  to  succeed,  he  decided  to  build,  opposite 
the  temple  of  Apollo,  a  tabernacle  wherein  to 
place  the  relics  of  Babylas  the  Martyr.  It  appears 
that  this  aim  was  accomplished.  The  presence 
of  the  martyr's  relics  attracted  to  the  perfumed 
grove  of  Daphne  a  crowd  of  Christian  devotees, 
and  put  the  lovers  to  flight,  by  diffusing  a  veil 
of  sadness  that  obscured  the  brilliancy  of  the 
rays  of  Apollo. 

The  religious  revolution  having  taken  place, 

^  Sozom.,  op.  cit.^  508,  <u  yap  7;  diarpi^r}  enTos  epcopeuT]s  iv  Adcj^vrj 
(Tvy^avev,  7]\l6i6i  re  koi  a^apis  eSo/cet. 


356 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Julian,  upon  entering  Antioch,  wished  to  restore  to 
its  ancient  splendour  the  temple  and  worship  of 
Apollo,  and  this  was  impossible  without  removing 
to  some  other  place  the  relics  of  the  martyr,  which 
defiled  the  sacred  spot.  And  Julian  ordered  that 
they  should  be  transported  elsewhere.  This  order 
was  the  occasion  of  a  great  demonstration  on  the 
part  of  the  Christians  of  Antioch,  who,  according  to 
Sozomenes,  accompanied,  for  forty  stadia,  the 
remains  of  the  martyr,  chanting  psalms.  Julian 
was  greatly  irritated  by  this  demonstration,  and 
had  it  not  been  for  the  wise  counsel  of  Sallustius 
the  Prefect,  he  would  certainly  have  ordered  re- 
prisals. A  few  days  later,  however,  a  terrible  fire 
destroyed  the  temple  of  Apollo.  The  Christians 
affirmed  that  a  stroke  of  lightning,  sent  by  God, 
had  set  the  temple  on  fire,  but  Julian  did  not 
doubt,  for  an  instant,  that  the  Christians  had  com- 
mitted the  crime.  In  the  Misopogon  he  recalls 
this  fact  with  great  bitterness,  and  compares  the 
conduct  of  the  Antiochians  with  that  of  other  cities, 
in  which  they  rebuilt  the  temples  and  destroyed  the 
tombs  of  the  atheists — namely,  the  Christians — even 
committing  excesses  which  he  deplored.  The 
Antiochians,  on  the  contrary,  were  destroying  the 
altars  as  soon  as  they  were  rebuilt,  and  the  kind- 
ness with  which  he  admonished  them  had  no  effect. 

In  fact,  when  we  ordered  the  corpse  to  be  trans- 
ported, those  of  you,  who  do  not  respect  divine 
things,  consigned  the  temple  to  those  who  were 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  357 


indignant  because  of  the  transportation  of  the  relics, 
and  these,  I  know  not  whether  secretly  or  not,  lit 
this  fire,  which  horrified  strangers,  gave  pleasure  to 
your  people,  and  to  which  your  senate  was,  and 
still  remains,  indifferent !  "  ^  And  it  was  perhaps  in 
consequence  of  this  outrage  that  Julian  gave  orders, 
by  a  decree  quoted  by  Sozomenes,  to  destroy  two 
sanctuaries  of  martyrs  which  were  being  erected  in 
Miletus,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  temple  of 
Apollo.' 

All  these  partial  acts  of  violence,  having  simply 
an  episodic  character,  and  being  the  consequence 
of  the  reciprocal  reprisals  of  two  parties  having 
almost  the  same  strength,  are  not  sufficient  to  alter 
the  substantial  fact  of  the  religious  tolerance  that 
Julian  believed  to  be  the  most  efficacious  instrument 
for  the  restoration  he  had  intended  to  beg^in. 
We  have  already  spoken  of  the  intelligent  and 
characteristic  foresight  displayed  by  Julian  in  re- 
calling to  their  sees  the  bishops  exiled  by 
Constantius  on  account  of  theological  dissensions. 
In  Julian's  letters  we  find  the  most  curious  and 
interesting  particulars  about  this  decision. 

The  ruling  party  at  the  court  of  Constantius 
were  not  the  pure  Arians,  but  rather  the  "op- 
portunist" section  of  that  party,  which,  while  not 
admitting  the  consubstantiality  of  the  Father  and 
the  Son,  as  maintained   by  Athanasius  and  the 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  466,  i  sq.  -  Sozom.,  op.  cit.^  511. 


358 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Council  of  Niccea,  did  not  affirm  the  distinction 
and  subordination  of  the  Son  to  the  Father,  as 
maintained  by  the  pure  Arians.  Constantius,  as 
we  know,  had  accepted  the  so-called  "  homoian " 
formula,  which  declared  that  the  Son  is  equal  to  the 
Father,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  forbade  all 
analysis  or  determination  of  such  a  likeness. 
Constantius  imposed  this  formula  on  the  two 
Councils  of  Rimini  and  Seleucia,  in  the  year  359, 
and  then  he  exiled  all  the  bishops  who  did  not 
adhere  to  this  decision,  those  of  the  Athanasian 
"  extreme  right "  as  well  as  those  of  the  Arian 
''extreme  left."  Julian  recalled  them  all  without 
distinction.  However,  it  is  rather  singular  to 
observe  the  diversity  of  treatment  of  the  two  heroes 
of  these  great  theological  battles,  the  deacon  Aetius, 
who  represented  uncompromising  Arianism,  and 
the  great  Athanasius,  the  lawmaker  of  the  Nicsean 
Council.  To  the  former  Julian  sent  the  following 
short  note  :  ^ — 

I  recalled  from  exile  all  those,  whoever  they 
may  be,  who  were  exiled  by  Constantius  on  account 
of  the  foolishness  of  the  Galileans.  As  to  thee,  not 
only  do  I  recall  thee,  but,  remembering  our  old 
acquaintance  and  intercourse,  I  invite  thee  to  come 
and  see  me.  To  journey  to  my  encampment  thou 
mayst  employ  one  of  the  state  carriages  and  also 
an  extra  horse." 

Who  was  this  Aetius  whom  the  Emperor  treats 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  522. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  359 

with  such  special  favour?  He  was  one  of  the 
Emperor's  old  acquaintances.  We  will  first  give 
a  cursory  glance  at  his  character,  and  then  compare 
him  with  the  great  Athanasius,  and  thus  we  shall 
have  before  us  two  characteristic  portraits  of  the 
Christian  type  in  the  fourth  century.  Aetius  was  a 
Syrian  by  birth,  and  in  his  youth  devoted  himself 
to  the  most  different  pursuits.  First,  he  was  a 
caster  of  metals,  then  a  physician,  and,  little  by 
little,  he  became  known  on  account  of  the  restless- 
ness of  his  spirit  and  his  singular  ability  in  theo- 
logical discussions,  which  were  the  intellectual 
passion  of  the  age.  If  we  are  to  believe  Socrates, 
he  was  much  better  versed  in  the  dialectics  of 
Aristotle  than  in  the  knowledge  of  the  Christian 
writers,  and  professed  contempt  for  Clement  and 
Origen/  Having  been  sent  away  from  Antioch  as 
a  disturber  of  religious  peace,  Aetius  took  up  his 
abode  in  Cilicia,  especially  in  Tarsus,  where  he 
became  an  intimate  friend  of  the  followers  of  the 
Lucianist  ideas,  and  one  of  their  most  ardent 
apostles.  Later  on,  when  he  returned  to  Antioch, 
he  made  a  friend  of  the  presbyter  Leontius,  who 
also  belonged  to  the  Lucianist  school.  Again  he 
rushes  to  Cilicia,  and  travels  to  Alexandria  to  dispute 
with  Gnostics  and  Manichseans ;  but  when  Leontius 
is  made  Bishop  of  Antioch,  he  returns  there,  and 
is  consecrated  deacon.  He  raises,  however,  such  a 
storm  of  discord  and  dispute  around  the  bishop, 

^  Socrat.,  op.  cit.^  io8. 


360 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


that  Leontius  is  obliged  to  keep  him  away  from  the 
sacred  functions,  though  retaining  him  in  his 
position  of  teacher.  It  appears  that,  in  351,  he 
assisted  at  the  Synod  of  Sirmium,  where  he  fiercely 
opposed  the  Athanasians.  These  seem  to  have 
attempted  to  influence  against  him  Gallus,  Julian's 
brother,  who,  as  we  know,  had  been  elected  by 
Constantius  to  the  office  of  Caesar.  But  they  did 
not  succeed.  On  the  contrary,  Aetius  was  so  much 
master  of  the  situation,  and  so  thoroughly  in  the 
confidence  of  Gallus,  that  he  often  sent  him  as  his 
confidential  messenger  to  his  brother  Julian.  From 
this  arose  the  acquaintance  between  the  prince  and 
the  Arian  deacon,  and  it  was  the  cause  of  the 
special  favour  which  he  accorded  him  when  he 
ascended  the  throne.  Gregory  of  Nyssa  accuses 
Aetius  of  having  been  the  counsellor  of  Gallus 
in  the  murders  of  the  Prefect  Domitianus  and 
the  Quaestor  Montius — horrible  crimes,  of  which 
Gallus'  death  was  the  fatal  consequence.  But 
what  faith  can  be  placed  in  the  affirmation  of  the 
Athanasian  bishop,  when  Athanasians  and  Arians 
were  both  most  unscrupulous  in  their  mutual  accusa- 
tions ?  In  356,  Aetius  went  to  Alexandria,  the  great 
centre  of  theological  disputes,  and  took  his  stand  as 
an  uncompromising  Arian  of  the  extreme  left," 
and  there  spoke  and  wrote  as  one  of  the  chiefs 
of  a  "young"  Arianism.  Recalled  to  Antioch  by 
Bishop  Eudoxius,  he  compromised  him  so  much  by 
his  exasperating  attitude,  that  the  Semi- Arians  easily 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  361 


succeeded  in  influencing  Constantius,  and  obtained 
the  removal  of  the  Bishop,  and  Aetius  was  exiled 
to  Phrygia.  In  360,  a  year  afterwards,  Constantius 
having  finally  decided  for  the  "  homoian  "  formula, 
with  which  he  imagined  he  could  impose  peace  on 
those  who  were  rending  the  Church  with  their  dis- 
cords, became  even  more  severe  in  his  treatment 
of  Aetius,  who,  deprived  of  his  position  of  deacon 
by  the  Synod  of  Constantinople,  was  confined,  by 
his  orders,  in  Pisidia.  When  Julian  came  to  the 
throne,  Aetius  found  his  condition  much  improved. 
Recalled  from  exile,  his  deposition  declared  null, 
he,  together  with  other  Arians,  was  reconsecrated 
by  a  synod  convened  at  Antioch.  The  fiery 
disputant  probably  died  shortly  afterwards,  because 
we  find  no  further  trace  of  him. 

We  do  not  know  if  Aetius  accepted  the 
invitation  of  the  Emperor,  who,  at  the  same  time  as 
he  asked  him  to  visit  him,  denounced  Christianity 
as  a  folly ;  but,  if  he  accepted  it,  he  did  not 
succeed  in  making  Julian  favour  Arianism.  Julian 
was  absolutely  indifferent  and  impartial  regarding 
the  Christian  sects,  as  to  him  they  were  all  equally 
odious.  And  that  the  Arians  were  by  no  means 
an  exception  is  proved  by  a  letter,  written  on  the 
occasion  of  tumults  instigated  in  Edessa  by  the 
Arians,  which  is  as  just  in  its  inspiration  as  it  is 
merciless  in  its  irony. 

To  Hecebolius, — I  treat  all  the  Galileans 
with  so  much  consideration  and  benevolence  that 


362 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


none  of  them  have  ever  suffered  violence,  and  I 
do  not  wish  that  any  of  them  should  be  dragged 
to  the  temples,  or  forced  to  do  anything  contrary 
to  their  convictions.  But  those  of  the  Arian 
Church,  puffed  up  with  pride  on  account  of  their 
wealth,  have  assailed  the  Valentinians,  and  com- 
mitted disorders  in  Edessa  that  should  not  be 
permitted  in  any  well-conducted  city.  A  most 
admirable  law,  however,  teaches  the  Christians 
that  it  is  necessary  to  be  poor  to  enter  the 
kingdom  of  heaven ;  now  to  assist  them,  we 
command  that  all  the  property  of  the  Church 
of  the  Edessians  be  confiscated  and  distributed 
to  the  soldiers,  and  the  lands  form  part  of  our 
domain.  Thus,  being  impoverished,  they  will 
become  wise,  and  will  obtain  the  hoped-for 
kingdom  of  heaven."^ 

We  must,  therefore,  be  convinced  that  Julian's 
courtesy  towards  Aetius  was  entirely  caused  by  a 
sentiment  of  personal  sympathy,  and  that  he  had 
not  the  slightest  tendency  towards  Arianism,  for 
this  would  have  been  truly  inexplicable,  con- 
sidering that,  in  the  Semi-Arian  court  of  Con- 
stantius,  he  had  found  his  fiercest  adversaries. 
Nevertheless,  the  personage  who  aroused  in  the 
Emperor  the  most  implacable  antipathy  was  to 
be  found  in  the  opposite  faction,  and  it  was  none 
other  than  the  great  Athanasius,  the  founder  of 
Catholic  Orthodoxy.    These  two  men,  both  highly 

^  Julian.,  op,  cit.,  547. 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  363 


gifted,  the  one  representing  the  past  and  the  other 
the  future,  the  one  reviving  Hellenism,  the  other 
dominant  Christianity,  must  have  been  incom- 
patible with  each  other.  The  fact  that  Julian  was 
so  bitter  against  Athanasius,  who  was  one  of 
the  victims  of  Constantius,  proves  that,  notwith- 
standing his  youth,  he  had  a  profound  knowledge 
of  men,  and  saw  where  the  peril  lay.  He  felt 
that  the  strength  of  Christianity  was  not  in  corrupt 
Arianism,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  it  was 
the  sovereign  ruler  of  half  the  Christian  world, 
but  rather  in  the  enthusiastic  energy  of  the  party 
who  had  uplifted  the  banner  of  the  sacred  mystery 
of  the  Trinity,  and  gathered  around  the  imposing 
personality  of  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria.  If 
Athanasius  had  disappeared.  Catholic  Orthodoxy 
would  never  have  been  founded,  and  Christianity 
would  never  have  had  that  ororanisation  which 
has  caused  it  to  lose  its  original  character,  but 
which  was  necessary,  in  order  to  keep  it  alive. 
To  fully  appreciate  the  importance  of  the  duel 
between  Julian  and  Athanasius,  it  is  necessary 
to  study  the  personality  of  the  latter. 

No  existence  was  more  tempestuous  or  more 
heroic  than  that  of  Athanasius.  A  novelist  of 
vivid  imagination,  a  Sienkiewicz,  might  weave 
around  him  an  epic  tale.  There  is  nothing  that 
gives  so  clear  an  idea  of  the  atmosphere  of  the 
fourth  century  as  a  study  of  this  great  personality 
and  of  his  adventurous  career.    The  man  was 


364 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


truly  great,  a  born  ruler,  an  inflexible  adversary, 
a  mighty  soul,  capable  of  the  highest  flights. 
There  is  undoubtedly  a  great  analogy  between 
Athanasius  and  Ambrose.  But  Ambrose's  position 
was  much  less  dangerous  and  difficult  than  that 
of  Athanasius.  Except  during  the  regency  of 
Justina,  the  authority  of  Ambrose  was  never 
disputed,  but,  even  then,  the  influence  of  the 
bishop  was  so  much  stronger  than  that  of  the 
empress  as  to  leave  no  question  as  to  the  final 
victory.  With  the  exception  of  this  passing 
encounter,  the  influence  of  Ambrose  was  absolute, 
and,  in  his  war  against  Arianism,  he  had  at  his 
disposal  the  aid  of  the  Imperial  power.  Gratianus 
and  Theodosius  were  two  instruments  in  his 
hands,  with  which  he  succeeded  in  establishing 
Catholic  Orthodoxy  as  the  religion  of  state.  The 
life  of  Athanasius,  on  the  contrary,  was  one  of 
incessant  and  gigantic  struggles.  He  had  the 
empire  against  him.  If  we  except  Constantine 
at  the  moment  of  the  Council  of  Nicaea,  and  the 
transient  reign  of  Jovian,  he  was  persecuted  by 
all  the  emperors  who  reigned  on  the  throne  of 
Constantinople  during  his  life — Constantius,  Julian, 
and  Valens. 

Born  in  the  last  years  of  the  third  century, 
Athanasius  passed  the  first  years  of  his  youth 
in  Alexandria,  by  the  side  of  Bishop  Alexander, 
and  to  his  influence  are  due  the  first  dissensions 
between  the  bishop  and  the  presbyter  Arius,  which 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  365 


afterwards  led  to  the  great  civil  war  of  Early 
Christianity.  Even  at  the  Council  of  Nicsea, 
Athanasius  was  an  imposing  figure,  and  Arianism 
recognised  in  him  the  most  powerful  of  its  enemies. 
At  Alexander's  death  he  was  elected,  in  328, 
Bishop  of  Alexandria.  But  the  opposition  of 
his  Arian  clergy  was  so  energetic,  and  the 
accusations  against  the  newly-elected  bishop  so 
numerous,  that  Constantine,  seeing  the  failure 
of  his  Orthodox  policy,  and  beginning  to  lean 
towards  Arianism,  called  the  accused  to  justify 
himself,  first  before  him,  at  Nicomedia,  and, 
afterwards,  when  the  accusations  were  renewed, 
before  a  Council  convened  at  Caesaraea  in  334. 
Athanasius,  however,  delayed  presenting  himself, 
and  managed  privately  to  persuade  Constantine  of 
his  innocence  and  to  regain  his  favour.  But  his 
enemies  were  bent  on  his  ruin.  Eusebius  of 
Nicomedia,  the  future  educator  of  Julian,  who 
lived  near  the  Emperor,  persuaded  him  to  convoke 
another  synod,  in  335,  at  Tyre,  which  sat  in 
judgment  on  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria.  He 
presented  himself  at  the  Council  with  a  powerful 
following  of  fifty  bishops,  but  being  convinced  that 
his  condemnation  was  a  foregone  conclusion,  he  did 
not  wait  for  the  decree  of  destitution,  and  embarked 
for  Constantinople,  trusting  to  his  personal  influence 
on  the  mind  of  Constantine.  Nor  was  he  in  the 
wrong ;  for  the  Emperor,  placed  between  the 
Council  and   Athanasius,  inclined  more  towards 


366  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


the  latter.  And  now  Eusebius  made  another  accusa- 
tion, and  this  time  of  a  non-theological  nature,  and 
so  grave  as  to  make  a  profound  impression  upon 
the  mind  of  the  Emperor  :  he  accused  Athanasius 
of  having  threatened  to  stop  the  annual  pro- 
vision of  grain  that  was  usually  sent  from  Alex- 
andria to  Constantinople.  Constantine  refused  to 
hold  any  further  communication  with  Athanasius, 
and  immediately  exiled  him  to  Treves,  in  Germany, 
where  he  received  a  most  courteous  reception  from 
the  Emperor's  son,  and  found  an  ardent  upholder 
of  his  theological  opinions  in  Bishop  Maximinus. 

Constantine  having  died  in  337,  Athanasius 
returned  in  triumph  to  Alexandria,  and  reassumed 
his  office.  This  was  the  signal  for  a  renewal  of 
the  trouble.  Athanasius,  who  was  certainly  not 
a  tolerant  man,  deposed  from  their  ecclesiastical 
offices  all  those  who  had  been  his  adversaries, 
and  put  in  their  places  his  own  friends,  thereby 
exciting,  more  and  more,  the  anger  of  the  Arians. 
On  the  throne  of  Constantinople  sat  Constantius, 
a  Semi-Arian  who  only  saw  with  the  eyes  of 
Eusebius.  He,  therefore,  sent  to  Alexandria  a 
new  bishop,  Gregory,  surrounded  by  a  strong 
military  escort,  so  as  to  overcome  by  force  any 
resistance  which  might  be  encountered.  Gregory's 
arrival  was  the  cause  of  insurrections  and  scenes 
of  violence.  Athanasius,  recognising  that  all 
resistance  was  useless,  in  March  340,  went  into  exile 
for  the  second  time,  and  took  up  his  abode  in  Rome 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  367 


with  Bishop  JuHus.  In  the  West,  Athanasius 
found  friends  and  supporters,  among  whom  the 
most  important  were  the  Emperor  Constans,  who, 
unhke  his  brother  Constantius,  was  on  the  side  of 
Orthodoxy.  In  the  next  five  years,  the  indefatig- 
able Athanasius  devoted  himself,  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  Emperor,  to  the  defence  and  glory  of 
the  faith  which  he  professed  with  a  conviction  that 
was  truly  heroic.  In  Milan,  in  Gaul,  at  Aquileia, 
he  was  the  religious  lawgiver.  In  the  meanwhile, 
even  in  the  East,  circumstances  were  becoming 
favourable  to  him.  Constantius  considerinQf  it 
better  policy  not  to  have  any  open  rupture  with 
his  brother,  affected  to  become  more  friendly  in 
his  opinions,  so  that,  when  Bishop  Gregory  died 
in  345,  Athanasius  was  allowed  to  present  himself 
before  Constantius  in  Antioch,  and  even  to  be 
reinstated  by  him  in  his  see  of  Alexandria.  In 
346  he  re-entered  Alexandria  amidst  the  rejoicings 
of  the  people.  But  the  peace  was  of  short  duration. 
Constans  dying  in  350,  Constantius  no  longer  felt 
any  necessity  for  concealing  his  partiality  for 
Arianism.  As  a  consequence,  the  war  against 
Athanasius  was  renewed,  and  he  was  accused  of 
being  the  disturber  of  the  peace  of  the  Church. 
Various  attempts  to  get  possession  of  the  person 
of  the  Bishop  were  unsuccessful,  owning  to  the 
threatening  attitude  of  the  population  of  Alexandria. 
But,  finally,  on  the  night  of  February  the  9th,  356, 
the  governor,  Syrianus,  with  a  strong  force  of 


368 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


soldiers,  succeeded  in  effecting  an  entrance  into  the 
church,  where  the  Bishop  was  celebrating  divine 
service.  A  scene  of  riot  and  bloodshed  ensued, 
during  which  Athanasius  disappeared.  The  vic- 
torious Arians  regained  all  the  offices  of  which 
they  had  been  deprived,  and  George,  with  whose 
unfortunate  end  we  are  already  acquainted,  was 
appointed  to  the  episcopal  see. 

During  this  third  exile,  which  lasted  from  356 
to  361,  Athanasius  lived  in  the  hermitages  of 
Upper  Egypt,  returning  secretly,  from  time  to  time, 
to  Alexandria,  and  kept  up  the  spirits  of  his  party 
by  the  writings  which  he  composed  in  his  fruitful 
solitude.  If,  however,  we  put  faith  in  Sozomenes, 
the  fiery  Bishop  passed  this  period  of  renewed 
persecution  more  pleasantly.  The  historian  nar- 
rates that  Athanasius  remained  in  Alexandria  con- 
cealed in  the  home  of  a  virgin  of  singular  beauty 
of  a  beauty  unrivalled  by  that  of  any  woman 
in  Alexandria.  But  we  shall  reproduce  the  words 
of  Sozomenes,  which  offer  us  a  peculiar  ragout  of 
sanctity  and  romance,  and  which  to  us  appear 
most  heterogeneous,  though  no  doubt  this  account 
proved  very  tasty  to  the  literary  palates  of  the 
fourth  century.  "  The  virgin  appeared  as  a  marvel 
to  all  who  saw  her,  but  those  who  wished  to  keep 
their  reputation  for  temperance  and  wisdom  fled 
from  her,  for  fear  that  they  might  be  suspected. 
Because  she  was  in  the  flower  of  her  youth,  and 
of   supreme   dignity   and   modesty.  .  .  .  Now, 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  369 


Athanasius,  induced  to  save  himself  by  a  divine 
vision,  took  refuge  with  this  virgin.  And  when  I 
investigate  this  event,  I  seem  to  see  in  it  the  hand 
of  God,  who,  not  wishing  that  the  friends  of 
Athanasius  should  suffer  harm,  if  ever  any  one 
should  question  them  concerning  him,  or  force 
them  to  take  oath,  led  him  to  conceal  himself  near 
one  whose  excessive  beauty  would  not  permit  the 
suspicion  that  a  priest  could  be  found  near  her/ 
She  received  him  with  courage,  and  kept  him  in 
safety  by  her  prudence,  and  was  such  a  faithful 
guardian  and  thoughtful  handmaiden  that  she  even 
washed  his  feet,  prepared  his  food,  and  all  other 
things  that  are  demanded  by  the  necessities  of 
nature.^  She  also  procured  from  others  the 
books  that  were  necessary  to  him.  And  although 
this  lasted  for  a  very  long  time,  none  of  the 
citizens  of  Alexandria  were  aware  of  it."^ 

Now,  whether  Athanasius  found  refuge  in  the 
midst  of  the  desert,  or  remained  concealed  in  the 
innermost  recesses  of  the  virginal  home  of  this 
beautiful  maiden,  his  actions  and  his  presence  were 
spiritually  felt  in  the  emotional  atmosphere  of 
Alexandria,  so  that  Bishop  George,  who  we 
know  was  a  headstrong  man,  had,  by  no  means, 
a  quiet  life,  and  was  at  every  moment  exposed 
to  the  violence  of  a  population  incensed  against 

^  rjs  TO  fiev  KoXXos  6v  (rvv€^6)p€L  vTrovoeladat  ev6a.de  didyeiv  rbv  Icpia. 
^  KOL  ocra  (fyCais  vnofxeveiv  /Sid^erai  ev  rais  Karen eiyovcrais  \pelaii. 
^  Sozom.,  op.  cit.^  489. 
VOL.  II. — 4 


370 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


him,  so  that  as  soon  as  Julian  ascended  the  throne, 
their  long-pent-up  fury  burst  forth  in  all  its  force, 
and  led  them  to  that  terrible  act  which  the 
Athanasians  regarded  with  indifference,  and  most 
probably  connived  at. 

As  soon  as  Julian's  decision  was  published, 
authorising  those  bishops  who  had  been  exiled 
by  his  Arian  predecessor  to  return  home,  Athanasius 
not  only  re-entered  Alexandria,  but,  without  any 
hesitation,  re-occupied  the  episcopal  throne,  and 
resumed,  with  renewed  energy,  his  work  of  propa- 
gandism  and  opposition. 

Now,  the  conduct  of  Athanasius  interfered  with 
Julian's  policy,  as  he  wished  to  place  the  Christian 
parties  on  a  footing  of  equality  and  reciprocal 
tolerance,  expecting  that,  by  this  means,  they  would 
mutually  we'aken  each  other.  But  nothing  was 
further  from  his  thoughts  than  to  assist  Orthodoxy 
in  overcoming  Arianism,  and,  therefore,  there  was 
no  one  more  suspected  and  more  odious  to  him 
than  the  over-zealous  Athanasius.  Julian  was,  for 
this  reason,  very  much  incensed  at  the  brilliant 
reappearance  of  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  and 
felt  that  he  could  not  tolerate  him.  He  foresaw, 
in  Athanasius,  an  enemy  much  more  powerful  than 
himself,  and  had  an  intuition  that  he  would  render 
fruitless  the  task  to  which  he  had  dedicated  his  life, 
so  he  decided  to  silence  him  at  once.  He  began 
his  persecution  under  the  pretence  that  Athanasius 
had  transgressed  the  law.    As  it  was,  the  Emperor, 


JULIANAS  ACTIOxN  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  371 

in  his  edict,  had  conceded  to  the  exiled  Christians 
the  right  of  returning  to  their  homes,  but  nothing 
had  been  said  about  permitting  them  to  re- 
assume  the  government  of  their  respective  churches. 
Athanasius,  notwithstanding  this,  did  not  hesitate 
an  instant  to  take  the  place  of  the  murdered 
George.  Julian  at  once  sent  the  following  decree 
to  the  Alexandrians:  ''A  man  exiled  by  so  many 
decrees,  by  so  many  emperors,  should  certainly 
have  awaited  a  special  authorisation  before  re-enter- 
ing the  country,  and  should  not  immediately  offend 
the  laws,  by  his  audacity  and  folly,  as  if  they  seemed 
to  have  no  importance  to  him.  We  have  allowed 
the  Galileans  exiled  by  Constantius  to  return  to 
their  homes,  but  not  to  their  churches.  And  now 
I  hear  that  this  most  audacious  Athanasius,  puffed 
up  by  his  habitual  impudence,  has  resumed  that 
which  they  call  the  episcopal  throne,  which  is  most 
decidedly  disagreeable  to  the  pious  people  of 
Alexandria.  We,  therefore,  order  him  to  leave  the 
city  the  very  day  on  which  he  receives  this  letter, 
and  this  he  may  consider  as  a  proof  of  our  leniency. 
But  if  he  remain,  we  will  condemn  him  to  greater 
and  more  vexatious  chastisements."-^  It  appears 
that  Athanasius,  notwithstanding  this  threat,  re- 
mained in  the  city,  and  furthermore,  not  content  with 
fighting  the  Arians,  carried  on  a  very  successful 
propaganda  among  the  pagans,  making  many  con- 
verts to  Christianity,  especially  among  the  women. 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  514. 


372 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Julian,  infuriated  at  this,  sends  to  ^Edychius,  the 
Governor  of  Egypt,  the  following  note  : — 

If  thou  didst  not  want  to  write  to  me  on  other 
subjects,  thou  shouldst  at  least  have  informed  me 
about  Athanasius,  that  enemy  of  the  gods,  as  thou 
wast  well  aware  of  what  I  had  wisely  decided  some 
time  ago.  I  swear  by  the  mighty  Serapis  that  if, 
before  the  Kalends  of  December,  this  enemy  of  the 
gods,  Athanasius,  has  not  left,  not  only  the  city, 
but  also  Egypt,  I  will  impose  on  the  province 
administered  by  thee  the  fine  of  one  hundred 
pounds  in  gold.  Thou  knowest  how  slow  I  am 
to  condemn,  but  also  that  I  am  much  slower  in 
pardoning,  once  that  I  have  condemned." 

It  appears  that  thus  far  the  decree  was  dictated 
by  Julian  to  a  secretary.  But  suddenly  overcome 
by  an  outburst  of  indignation,  he  seizes  a  stilus 
and  writes  :  With  my  own  hand. — To  me  it  is 
a  great  grief  to  be  disobeyed.  By  all  the  gods, 
nothing  could  give  me  more  pleasure  than  that 
thou  shouldst  expel  from  every  corner  of  Egypt, 
Athanasius,  that  criminal  who  has  dared,  during 
my  reign,  to  baptize  Greek  wives  of  illustrious 
citizens.    He  must  be  persecuted."  ^ 

In  his  first  decree  to  the  Alexandrians,  the 
Emperor  had  commanded  Athanasius  to  be  exiled 
from  the  city.  This  is  now  no  longer  sufficient, 
he  must  be  exiled  from  the  whole  of  Egypt.  And 
this  new  order,  transmitted  to  the  Governor  in  that 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  484. 


JULIAN^S  xVCTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  373 

note  composed  of  a  few  angry  phrases,  is  afterwards 
broadly  explained  in  the  following  proclamation  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Alexandria  : — 

''Julian  to  the  Alexandrians 

"  Even  admitting  that  your  founder  would  have 
been  one  of  those  who,  by  disobeying  the  paternal 
law,  had  the  merited  punishment,  and  preferred  to 
live  illegally  and  to  introduce  a  revelation  and 
a  new  doctrine,  you  would  not  have  the  right  to 
demand  of  me  Athanasius.  But  having  had, 
instead,  as  your  founder,  Alexander,  and,  as  your 
protector,  the  god  Serapis,  together  with  I  sis,  the 
virgin  Queen  of  Egypt  .  .  .  [here  the  text  is 
wanting]  .  .  .  you  do  not  wish  the  welfare  of  the 
city  ;  you  are  only  the  infected  part  of  it,  who 
dare  to  appropriate  to  yourselves  its  name. 

"  I  should  be  ashamed,  by  the  gods,  O 
Alexandrians,  if  only  one  of  you  confessed  to 
being  a  Galilean.  The  forefathers  of  the  Jews 
were  the  slaves  of  the  Egyptians.  And  now 
you,  O  Alexandrians,  after  having  subjected  the 
Egyptians  (since  your  founder  conquered  Egypt), 
you  offer  to  those  who  scorn  your  country's  laws, 
to  those  who,  in  olden  times,  you  kept  in  chains, 
your  voluntary  servitude.  Neither  do  you  re- 
member your  ancient  glory  and  prosperity,  when 
all  Egypt  was  united  in  the  worship  of  the  gods, 
and   enjoyed    every   blessing.      But    those  who 


374 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


introduced  among  you  this  new  revelation,  what 
advantage,  tell  me,  have  they  promoted  in  your 
city  ?  Your  founder,  Alexander  of  Macedonia,  was 
a  pious  man,  who,  by  Jupiter,  did  not  in  any  way 
resemble  them,  nor  even  the  Jews,  who  are  much 
more  worthy  than  they  are.  The  successors  of  the 
founder,  the  Ptolemies,  did  they  not  paternally 
treat  your  city  as  a  favourite  daughter  ?  Did  they 
make  the  town  prosper  with  the  sermons  of  Jesus, 
or  were  the  teachings  of  those  most  wicked 
Galileans  the  means  of  procuring  the  opulence  it 
now  enjoys  ?  Finally,  when  we  Romans  became 
masters  of  the  city,  after  expelling  the  Ptolemies, 
who  governed  unwisely,  Augustus,  presenting 
himself  before  you,  said  to  the  citizens  :  '  Inhabit- 
ants of  Alexandria,  I  hold  the  city  guiltless  of 
what  has  happened,  out  of  respect  for  the  great 
god  Serapis.'  .  .  . 

Of  all  the  favours  particularly  bestowed  on 
your  city  by  the  gods  of  Olympus  I  will  say 
nothing,  not  wishing  to  go  into  particulars.  But 
is  it  possible  that  you  can  ignore  the  favours  that 
the  gods  bestow  every  day,  not  on  a  few  men,  nor 
even  one  race  or  city,  but  on  the  entire  world  ? 
Is  it  possible  that  you  alone  are  not  aware  of  the 
rays  that  emanate  from  the  sun  ?  Do  you  not 
know  that  spring  and  winter  proceed  from  him  ? 
and  that  from  him  all  animals  and  plants  derive 
their  life?  Do  you  not  realise  for  how  many 
benefits  you  are  indebted  to  the  moon,  who  was 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  375 


born  from  him,  and  who  represents  him  in  every- 
thing ?  And  you  dare  not  to  bow  down  before 
these  gods?  And  you  beheve  that  for  you  is 
necessary  the  *  Logos '  of  God,  that  Jesus,  whom 
neither  you  nor  your  fathers  have  ever  seen  ?  And 
that  sun  whom  all  the  human  race  from  all  eternity 
contemplate  and  venerate,  and  who,  when  venerated, 
is  beneficent,  I  say,  the  great  sun-god,  the  living 
and  animated  and  rational  and  active  image  of  the 
intellectual  All  .  .  ."  Here  the  text  is  interrupted, 
and  we  lose  the  close  of  this  enthusiastic  hymn. 
But  later  it  continues  : — 

.  .  .  But  you  will  not  relinquish  the  right 
path  if  you  listen  to  me,  who,  by  the  help  of  the 
gods,  have  followed  it  since  my  twentieth  year, 
that  is,  for  twelve  years. 

If  you  would  be  willing  to  be  persuaded  by 
me,  it  will  afford  you  great  happiness.  If  you 
wish  to  remain  faithful  to  the  foolishness  and  the 
teachings  of  evil-minded  men,  arrange  things 
among  yourselves,  but  do  not  ask  me  for 
Athanasius.  There  are  already  too  many  of  his 
disciples  ready  to  tickle  your  ears,  if  you  enjoy, 
or  are  in  need  of,  impious  words.  Would  that  the 
wickedness  of  these  impious  teachings  were  limited 
to  Athanasius  alone  !  You  have  an  abundance  of 
able  persons,  and  there  is  no  difficulty  in  choosing. 
Any  one  that  you  may  pick  out  in  the  crowd,  as 
far  as  the  teaching  of  the  Scriptures  is  concerned, 
would  not  be  inferior  to  him  whom  you  desire. 


376 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


And  if  you  prefer  Athanasius  for  some  other 
quality  (they  tell  me  that  the  man  is  a  great 
intriguer),  and  because  of  this,  make  your  petition 
to  me,  know  ye  that  it  is  precisely  for  this  reason 
that  I  have  banished  him  from  the  city,  because 
the  man  who  wishes  to  interfere  in  everything  is 
by  nature  unfit  to  govern,  and  so  much  the  more 
so  when  he  is  not  even  a  man,  but  a  miserable 
apology  for  one,  as  your  great  teacher,  who  always 
imagines  that  his  life  is  in  danger,  and  who  is 
always  the  cause  of  continual  disorder.  Therefore, 
to  prevent  any  disturbance  from  taking  place,  we 
first  decreed  that  he  should  be  banished  from  the 
city,  and  now  from  the  whole  of  Egypt. 

This  order  be  communicated  to  our  citizens 
of  Alexandria !  "  ^ 

Athanasius  opposed  no  resistance  to  the  order 
of  Julian.  This  man  of  great  experience  and 
shrewdness,  who  had  passed  through  so  many 
other  perils  and  adventures,  understood  the  folly 
of  Julian's  attempt.  When  on  the  point  of  leaving 
Alexandria,  he  said  to  the  weeping  multitude  who 
surrounded  him  :  Be  of  good  heart,  this  is  only 
a  passing  cloud,  and  will  soon  disappear."^  A 
wonderful  prophecy,  pronounced  when  Julian  was 
at  the  apogee  of  his  youth  and  power,  which 
reveals,   by  the  calm   and  serene  confidence  of 

^  Julian.,  op.  ctt.^  556. 

-  Socrat.,  op.  cit.,  152. — Sozom.,  op.  df.,  500. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  377 


its  words,  the  dignity  and  greatness  of  mind 
of  this  illustrious  man,  much  more  efficaciously 
than  the  hyperbolical  invectives  of  a  Gregory  or  a 
Cyril. 

Julian's  proclamation  is  singularly  valuable  and 
interesting,  as  it  enables  us  to  penetrate  into  his 
ideas  and   intentions.     It   certainly  possesses  a 
certain  amount  of  polemical  skill,  by  means  of 
which  the  writer  seeks  to  shame  the  Alexandrians 
who  are  willing  to  submit  to  the  yoke  of  the 
descendants  of  those  Hebrews  whom  they  anciently 
had  as  their  slaves.    Julian  wonders  how  it  is 
possible  that  the  Alexandrians  have  fallen  into 
such  a  state  of  intellectual  impotence,  that  they 
seriously  take  into  consideration  a  figure,  like  that 
of  Jesus,  who  is  absolutely  devoid  of  all  historical 
importance,  and  whom  they  and  their  fathers  have 
never  seen,  while  they  daily  contemplate  the  sun 
— the  origin  of  life,  and  the  visible  representation 
of  the  supreme  God!    As  Julian  was  absolutely 
invulnerable  to  all  the  fascinations  that  emanated 
from  the  Gospel,  to  him  the  story  of  Jesus  was 
only  a   fable   composed   of  elements  unskilfully 
woven   together,  and   essentially  irrational.  He 
was  thus  astonished  that  any  one  could  consider 
it  in  a  different  light.    But,  notwithstanding  his 
convictions,    which    he    reveals    in    his  Hymn 
to   the  Sun  with  words  so  replete  with  feeling 
and  sincerity,  Julian  allows  nothing  to  dissuade 
him    from    his    predetermined    tolerance.  He 


378 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


deplores  the  blindness  of  the  Alexandrians,  and, 
because  of  his  personal  antipathy,  does  not  wish 
that  Athanasius  should  exercise  any  influence  over 
them.  But  he  does  not  prevent  the  Christians  of 
Alexandria  from  being  instructed  in  their  doctrine, 
and  following  the  many  masters  placed  at  their  dis- 
posal. It  seems  to  him  inconceivable  and  most 
unfortunate  that  the  Alexandrians  could  experience 
the  desire  of  listening  to  the  teachings  of  the 
Christians,  but,  if  such  be  the  case,  they  are  free 
to  do  so,  only  they  are  forbidden  to  listen  to 
Athanasius.  This  fierce  antipathy  that  Julian 
cherishes  against  the  Bishop  of  Alexandria  speaks 
highly  in  favour  of  the  latter,  and  is  an  evident 
proof  of  the  sterling  merits  of  this  truly  great 
personality.  In  Julian  there  certainly  can  be 
detected  the  anger  of  the  partisan  who  sees  before 
him  an  enemy  much  stronger  than  himself,  whom 
he  cannot  succeed  in  overcoming.  The  murder 
of  Bishop  George,  which  might  have  been  con- 
sidered as  an  indication  that  the  Alexandrians 
wished  to  return  to  Hellenism,  had  only  served 
to  reinstate  Athanasius  in  his  ancient  position, 
therefore  rendering  his  Christian  propaganda  more 
efficacious.  Thus  it  was  only  natural  and  human 
that  Julian,  irritated  by  this  condition  of  affairs, 
should  depart  for  a  while  from  his  customary 
moderation.  But  by  giving  to  his  anger  the 
character  of  a  personal  contest,  he  demonstrated 
that   neither    failure    nor    disappointment  could 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  379 


induce  him  to  be  guilty  of  a  systematic  and 
general  persecution. 

Julian's  argument  in  this  proclamation  to  the 
Alexandrians  gives  us  a  clear  insight  into  his 
mind.  Ancient  civilisation,  with  all  its  glory,  its 
traditions  and  its  memories,  appears  to  him  a 
heritage  so  precious  that  he  cannot  comprehend 
how  they  can  welcome  a  doctrine  that  does  not 
recognise  it,  has  an  origin  extraneous  to  it,  and, 
if  victorious,  would  end  by  overturning  and 
destroying  it.  But  how  ?  Will  tradition  be 
interrupted  and  history  closed  ?  Will  all  the 
glories  of  the  past  be  effaced  for  ever,  and 
cancelled  by  the  intrusion  of  a  foreign  element  ? 
But  who  would  dare  to  compare  the  value  of  this 
foreign  element  with  the  grandeur  of  the  historical 
memories  of  the  nation?  And  Julian,  to  express 
his  contempt  for  the  humble  origin  of  the  new 
doctrine,  only  speaks  of  the  Christians  as  Galileans. 
Is  it  possible  that,  from  a  small,  unknown,  barbarous 
corner  of  the  Empire,  there  should  arise  a  force 
capable  of  combating  and  vanquishing  the  most 
brilliant  and  powerful  traditions  ?  Is  it  possible 
that  the  Galileans  were  wiser  and  stronorer  than 
the  Greeks  ?  Is  it  possible  that  the  Alexandrians 
should  forget  Alexander,  the  Ptolemies,  and  the 
Romans,  and  Serapis  and  Isis — in  truth,  all  that 
structure  of  men,  religion,  laws  and  history,  on 
which  was  erected  their  civilisation,  their  wealth, 
and  their  prosperity  ?    Why  should  they  abandon 


380  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


all  these  cherished,  grand,  and  glorious  memories 
to  follow  the  call  of  Jesus? — of  a  man,  born  in 
Galilee,  an  absolute  stranger  to  the  Greek  and 
Roman  world,  untutored  and  unknown,  of  whom 
there  existed  only  uncertain  and  contradictory- 
reports — a  man  so  weak  and  nerveless  that  he 
allowed  himself  to  be  ignominiously  killed  ?  Is 
not  this  a  supreme  folly  ? 

This  argument  of  Julian  might  have  appealed 
to  those  who  did  not  believe  in  Christianity,  but  had 
not  the  slightest  importance  for  those  who  believed. 
Belief  is  not  a  thing  of  reason,  convenience,  or 
opportunity.  Faith  is  born  from  the  spontaneous 
impulse  of  the  human  soul  which  feels  the  necessity 
of  satisfying  certain  aspirations,  and,  when  born, 
no  reason  in  the  world  is  able  to  extinguish  it. 
All  Julian's  reminders  and  reminiscences  of  a 
glorious  past  were  vain  and  ineffectual,  as  they 
failed  to  touch  the  soul  that  had  experienced  the 
charm  of  Christianity,  and,  being  attracted  by 
other  ideals,  hastened  towards  that  source  where 
they  could  be  realised.  Then,  also,  it  was  too 
late.  If  a  discourse  such  as  Julian's  had  been 
pronounced  two  centuries  earlier  by  a  Marcus 
Aurelius,  when  paganism  flourished  in  all  its 
splendour,  and  Christianity  was  just  born,  it 
might  have  been  understood,  and  have  exercised 
a  certain  influence.  But  in  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  when  Christianity  had  been  officially 
recognised,  and  ruled  over  half  the  world,  this  dis- 


JULIANS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  381 


course  must  have  had  the  same  results  as  that  of 
a  faint  voice  coming  from  a  long  distance,  and 
powerless  to  awaken  an  echo  in  the  souls  of  those 
who  heard  it. 

In  his  duel  with  Athanasius,  Julian's  conduct, 
though  in  part  excusable,  lacked  moderation,  and 
assumed  the  aspect  of  a  personal  persecution. 
Another  case  in  which  Julian  allowed  his  hate 
to  betray  him  into  an  injustice  is  that  of  the 
Bishop  of  Bostra.  We  know  that  one  of  Julian's 
first  acts  was  to  recall  all  those  bishops,  exiled 
by  Constantius,  who,  for  the  most  part,  belonged 
to  the  Athanasian  party.  And  we  have  also 
observed  that,  underlying  this  decree,  which 
certainly  was  in  itself  an  act  of  tolerance,  there 
was  probably  the  desire  and  the  hope  that,  when 
the  heads  of  the  parties  into  which  Christianity 
was  divided  came  into  contact,  their  discord  would 
kindle  a  new  flame  which  would  consume  the 
power  of  the  Church.  The  previsions  of  this 
acute  emperor  were  soon  verified.  The  return 
of  the  exiles  was  the  signal  for  the  renewal 
of  the  storm.  Now  Julian,  to  further  his  aims, 
wished  to  profit  by  it.  In  his  war  against 
Christianity,  his  first  object  was  to  destroy  the 
influence  of  the  bishops.  Once  these  were 
conquered,  it  would  be  easier  to  master  the 
people.  And  these  internal  discords  suggested 
to  him  an  artifice,  of  which  his  letter  to  the  citizens 


382 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  Bostra  furnishes  a  singular  example.  The 
Emperor  addresses  himself  to  the  Christian  popula- 
tion of  that  city,  to  assure  them  that  he  will  not 
hold  them  responsible  for  the  disorders  that  have 
taken  place  there.  It  is  the  bishops  who  are 
responsible,  because  they  inflame  the  souls  of  the 
deceived  and  ignorant.  But  they  must  not  believe 
that  the  bishops  are  exclusively  influenced  by 
religious  zeal.  Quite  the  contrary.  If  it  were 
so,  they  would  be  pleased  with  the  clemency  and 
impartiality  exercised  by  Julian,  who  has  restored 
peace  to  the  Church.  But  the  truth  is  that  this 
clemency  prevented  them  and  the  rest  of  the 
higher  clergy  from  making  bad  use  of  their  positions, 
and  enriching  themselves  by  appropriating  that 
which  belonged  to  their  rivals.  The  Christian 
congregations  should  open  their  eyes,  and  not 
fall  into  the  traps  that  the  bishops  had  set  for 
them,  making  them  the  instruments  of  their  base 
covetousness.  But  the  artifice  of  the  Imperial 
disputant  could  hardly  apply  to  Titus,  the  Bishop 
of  Bostra,  who  used  all  his  influence  to  make 
peace,  and  who,  honestly  believing  that  he  had 
acted  in  a  manner  to  entitle  him  to  Julian's 
approbation,  and,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that 
the  Christians  constituted  the  majority  of  the 
population,  had,  by  means  of  his  exhortations, 
prevented  them  from  doing  harm  to  any  one.  This 
imprudent  phrase  gave  the  Emperor  an  opportunity 
of  attempting,  with  perfidious  skill,  to  ruin  the  poor 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  383 


Bishop.  He  quotes  in  his  letter  this  isolated  phrase, 
and  pretends  to  infer  from  it  that  the  Bishop  claimed 
all  the  merit  of  having  kept  peace  among  the  citizens 
of  Bostra,  who  otherwise  would  have  caused  riots, 
and  who  unwillingly  obeyed  his  injunctions.  Julian 
concludes  by  saying  that  Titus  is  a  calumniator, 
and  that  the  people  of  Bostra  must  expel  him  from 
the  city. 

But  we  will  reproduce  in  its  entirety  this 
curious  letter,  of  which  we  have  already  ^  noted 
the  exhortations  to  religious  tolerance. 

To  THE  Inhabitants  of  Bostra 

I  believed  that  the  chiefs  of  the  Galileans 
should  feel  a  greater  thankfulness  to  me  than  to 
him  who  preceded  me  in  the  government  of  the 
Empire.  For  while  he  reigned  many  of  them 
were  exiled,  persecuted,  and  imprisoned,  and  whole 
multitudes  of  so-called  heretics  were  murdered, 
so  that,  in  Samosata,  Cyzicus,  in  Paphlagonia, 
Bithynia,  and  Galatia,  and  many  other  places, 
entire  villages  were  destroyed  from  their  founda- 
tions. Now,  under  my  rule,  just  the  opposite 
has  happened.  The  exiled  have  been  recalled,  and, 
by  means  of  a  law,  those  whose  goods  had  been 
confiscated,  received  them  back  again.  However, 
they  have  arrived  at  such  a  pitch  of  fury  and 
stupidity,  that  from  the  moment  they  were  no 
^  See  pp.  337-8. 


384 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


longer  allowed  to  tyrannise,  nor  to  continue  the 
strife  among  themselves,  and  oppressed  the 
worshippers  of  the  gods,  inflamed  with  anger, 
they  begin  to  hurl  stones,  and  dare  to  stir  up  the 
rabble,  and  make  riots,  impious  in  their  actions 
towards  the  gods  and  rebellious  to  our  decrees, 
notwithstanding  their  extreme  benevolence.  We 
do  not  permit  any  one  against  their  will  to  be 
dragged  to  the  altars,  and  w^e  openly  declare  that 
if  any  one  desires  to  participate  in  our  rites  and 
libations,  they  must  first  purify  themselves  and 
supplicate  the  punishing  divinities.  It  would  be 
thus  impossible  for  us  to  permit  any  of  those 
unbelievers,  because  they  desire  or  pretend  to  be 
present  at  our  sacred  rites,  before  they  have 
purified  their  souls  with  prayers  to  the  gods, 
and  their  bodies  by  lustration,  according  to  the 
law. 

Now,  it  is  manifest  that  the  crowd,  deceived 
by  the  clergy,  break  out  in  riots  just  because  the 
clergy  are  permitted  to  act  with  impunity.  In  fact, 
for  those  who  exercised  tyranny,  it  is  not  sufficient 
that  they  are  not  obliged  to  pay  the  penalty  of  the 
evil  that  they  have  done,  but,  desiring  to  re-acquire 
the  old  power,  now  that  the  law  no  longer  permits 
them  to  be  judges,  to  write  wills,  to  appropriate 
the  inheritance  of  others  and  to  take  all  for  them- 
selves, they  encourage  every  kind  of  disorder,  and  by 
throwing,  if  I  may  so  say,  fuel  on  the  fire,  they  add 
greater  ills  to  the  ancient  troubles,  and  drag  on  the 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  385 


multitude  to  discord.  I  have,  therefore,  decided  to 
proclaim,  and  render  manifest  to  all  by  means  of 
this  decree,  the  duty  of  not  assisting  the  clergy 
in  causing  riots,  and  not  permitting  themselves 
to  be  persuaded  to  throw  stones  and  disobey 
the  magistrates.  Otherwise,  all  are  allowed  to 
assemble  together  as  often  as  they  wish,  and  to 
make  such  prayers  as  they  think  fit.  But  they 
must  not  let  themselves  be  led  into  disorderly 
actions,  unless  they  wish  to  be  punished. 

I  believe  it  opportune  to  make  this  declaration, 
and  especially  to  thecitizensof  Bostra,  because  Bishop 
Titus  and  the  priests  around  him,  in  a  memorial 
they  have  sent  me,  accuse  the  population  of  being 
inclined  to  disorder,  in  spite  of  their  exhortations. 
Here  is  the  phrase  of  the  memorial  which  I  quote 
in  this  my  decree  : — *  Although  the  Christians  equal 
the  Greeks  in  numbers,  restrained  by  our  exhorta- 
tions, they  will  in  no  way  disturb  any  one.' — So  the 
Bishop  speaks  of  you.  You  see  he  says  your  good 
conduct  is  not  the  fruit  of  your  inclination,  but  is 
rather  due  to  the  power  of  his  exhortations. 
Therefore  you  should,  of  your  own  free  will,  banish 
him  from  your  city  as  your  accuser,  and  come  to  an 
agreement  among  yourselves,  so  that  there  should 
be  neither  disputes  nor  violence."  ^ 

Julian  finishes  his  letter  with  those  admoni- 
tions to  mutual  tolerance  which  we  have  already 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  559  sq. — Sozom.,  op.  cit.,  501. 
VOL.  II. — 5 


386  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


heard  (pp.  337,  338).  But  the  wisdom  of  this 
advice  does  not  excuse  JuHan's  conduct  towards 
Titus,  which  was  yet  more  grave  and  reprehensible 
than  his  treatment  of  Athanasius.  With  the  latter 
there  was  open  war,  and,  from  Julian's  point  of 
view,  war  was  justifiable.  But  the  ruse  he  used 
against  the  Bishop  of  Bostra  is  so  hypocritical 
that  it  leaves  a  stain  on  Julian's  character.  In  this 
letter  the  description  of  the  habits  of  the  Christian 
clergy  is  intensely  interesting  and  instructive  ; 
evidently  they  had  become  completely  corrupted  by 
the  high  position  they  had  attained.  The  thirst  for 
rapidly  acquired  wealth,  the  thirst  for  power,  and  the 
tendency  to  intrigue  was  so  clear  and  universal  that 
the  pagan  disputant  could  derive  from  it  argument, 
support,  and  justification  in  the  war  he  was  waging 
against  Christianity.  Julian  very  ably  puts  the 
question.  *'You  see,"  he  says,  "I  have  rendered 
the  Church  of  the  Galileans  incontestable  services. 
I  have  recalled  the  exiled,  have  given  back  the 
property  that  had  been  confiscated,  and  sought  to 
put  an  end  to  the  violence  by  which  it  was  rent 
asunder.  And,  instead  of  finding  gratitude,  I  have 
reaped  the  result  of  being  hated  by  all,  without 
distinction,  and  more  than  my  predecessor,  who 
fiercely  persecuted  one  half  of  the  Church  for  the 
benefit  of  the  other.  But  this  arises  from  the  fact 
that  peace  and  reciprocal  respect  are  not  desired  by 
the  heads  of  the  Church,  as  they  only  care  for 
impunity  in  their  abuse  of  power  and  deceit.  My 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  387 


system  of  government,  which  imposes  order  and 
toleration  of  opinions  and  beliefs,  and  absolute 
obedience  to  the  laws,  is  distasteful  to  those  who 
thus  find  their  hands  tied,  and  they  would  prefer 
arbitrary  power  and  violence,  because,  with  these, 
they  would  be  able  to  secure  their  own  interests." 
Scarcely  sixty  years  had  passed  since  the  persecu- 
tion of  Diocletian,  when  Christianity,  bleeding  and 
broken,  o^athered  to  its  bosom  all  the  heroism  of 
which  human  nature  was  capable,  and  behold !  a 
few  decades  of  security  and  prosperity  had  reduced 
it  to  an  institution  so  full  of  vices,  so  given  to  fraud, 
and  so  intensely  dominated  by  the  lust  for  wealth 
and  power,  as  to  permit  those  who  opposed  it  to 
assume  the  character  of  defenders  of  the  weak  and 
vindicators  of  outraged  morality.  Even  admit- 
ting that,  in  Julian's  words,  we  perceive  a  male- 
volent intention,  these  words  are  undoubtedly 
based  upon  the  truth.  If  this  had  not  been  so, 
the  argument  of  the  disputant  would  have 
proved  wholly  inefficacious.  The  divine  ideals 
of  primitive  Christianity,  by  adapting  themselves 
to  material  forms,  were  miserably  dissipated,  and 
Christianity  had  become  inoculated  with  those 
same  vices  which  it  was  its  mission  to  extirpate. 

I  think  that  I  have  clearly  demonstrated,  by  the 
assistance  of  documentary  evidence,  that  Julian's 
persecutions  only  existed  in  the  imagination  of 
those  authors  who  opposed  him,  or  were,  at  least. 


388 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


acts  of  defence,  not  always,  it  is  true,  blameless  and 
sincere,  and  sometimes  carried  to  excess  by  the 
untimely  zeal  of  certain  prefects.  But  there  is  one 
of  Julian's  acts,  one  that  is  authentic,  that  aroused 
the  greatest  indignation  on  the  part  of  his  Christian 
contemporaries,  and  is  even  now  considered  by 
many  historians  to  be  the  proof  of  the  aggressive 
intolerance  of  the  Imperial  apostate.  This  act  is 
the  promulgation  of  the  law  by  which  he  sought  to 
forbid  Christians  teaching  Greek  literature  in  the 
public  schools.  The  immense  importance  attributed 
to  this  act,  which,  after  all,  had  only  an  administra- 
tive character,  proves  how  little  they  must  have 
been  preoccupied  by  the  supposed  violence  of 
the  new  persecutor.  But,  at  all  events,  Julian's 
action  manifests  a  direction  of  thought  and  a 
tendency  that  had  arisen  for  the  first  time  in  the 
ancient  world,  and  it  is  this  same  that  afterwards 
developed  into  literary  censure.  We  have  already 
seen  how  Julian  advised  his  priests  not  to  read 
Epicurus.  Now,  by  this  decree,  he  wishes  to 
prevent  the  sacred  books  of  polytheism  from  being 
read  and  explained  by  masters,  according  to  his 
ideas,  incapable  of  comprehending  their  inspiration 
and  significance. 

But  just  because  Julian's  act  was  symptomatic 
of  a  new  attitude  of  the  human  mind,  we  must 
examine  it  in  its  origin  and  in  its  essence,  and 
seek  to  form  a  precise  judgment  concerning  it, 
based  on   the  objective   knowledge  of  the  con- 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  389 


ditions  in  the  midst  of  which  it  appeared.  And, 
first  of  all,  we  should  consider  the  position  that 
religion  had  taken  in  the  Grseco- Roman  society 
of  the  fourth  century,  after  the  promulgation  of 
the  Edict  of  Constantine. 

The  edict  with  which  Constantine  and  his  col- 
league Licinius  recognised  the  legal  existence  of 
Christianity,  published  in  Milan  in  the  year  313,  is  a 
document  that  would  reflect  the  greatest  honour 
on  the  philosophical  spirit  of  the  Emperor,  if  his 
subsequent  actions  had  not  demonstrated  that  this 
decree  was  not  the  effect  of  careful  reflection,  but 
simply  a  manoeuvre  of  political  ''opportunism." 

The  Roman  Empire,  like  all  the  other  states 
of  the  ancient  world,  had  a  national  religion, 
whose  acts  were  the  sanction  and  consecration 
of  its  existence.  But  polytheism,  just  because 
it  affirmed  the  multiplicity  of  the  gods,  did  not 
object  to  admit,  side  by  side  with  the  national 
gods,  foreign  divinities,  only  requiring  that,  in 
their  external  acts  of  worship,  they  conformed 
to  those  rules  which  were  necessarily  recognised 
by  the  authorities  of  the  State.  Christianity  was 
opposed,  just  because  it  forbade  its  adherents  to 
perform  these  acts,  and,  therefore,  appeared  as 
an  institution  politically  revolutionary.  Now,  that 
which  is  most  singular  and  original  in  Constantine's 
decree  is  not  the  proclamation  of  the  principle  of 
tolerance  for  all  religions,  but  the  explicit,  declared, 
and  absolute  abandonment  of  any  State  religion. 


390 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


The  State,  according  to  Constantine,  should  be 
satisfied  with  pure  theism — a  theism  so  rational 
as  to  be  absolutely  indifferent  as  to  the  modality 
of  the  worship  that  men  rendered  to  God.  And 
it  is  just  because  Constantine,  in  the  interest  of 
the  empire  and  the  Emperor,  wished  this  God  to 
be  prayed  to  by  all  men,  that  the  law  affirmed 
the  complete  liberty  of  worship,  and  abandoned 
all  claims  to  the  fulfilment  of  official  and 
determined  rites.  Whatever  the  external  forms 
might  be,  all  prayers  are  acceptable  to  God.  The 
State  has  no  right  to  prefer  or  choose  for  its  own 
one  form  rather  than  another.  The  supreme  im- 
portance to  the  State  and  the  Emperor  is  not  the 
manner  in  which  men  pray,  but  that  they  actually 
do  pray.  Every  link  between  the  State  and  a 
determined  religion  is  entirely  severed.  Con- 
stantine's  decree  is  evidently  inspired  by  the 
principle  of  ''libera  Cliiesa  in  libera  statoT 
Constantine  writes  to  the  governors  of  the 
provinces: — "We  give  to  the  Christian  and  to  all 
others  free  choice  of  following  that  worship  which 
they  prefer,  so  that  the  divinity  who  is  in  heaven 
may  be  propitious  to  us  and  to  all  those  under  our 
rule.  By  a  wise  and  most  just  process  of  reason- 
ing, we  are  induced  to  decree  that  no  one  shall 
be  refused  the  right  of  following  the  doctrine  and 
worship  of  the  Christians  ;  we  desire  that  every  one 
should  be  free  to  follow  the  relio^ion  that  seems 
to  him  most  suitable,  so  that  the  divinity  may, 


JULIANAS  ACTIOxV  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  391 


with  his  usual  benevolence,  assist  us  in  all  our 
undertakings.  .  .  .  We"  —  continues  the  Em- 
peror, addressing  himself  to  each  individual 
governor — ''warmly  recommend  our  decree  to 
thy  especial  attention,  so  that  thou  mayst  com- 
prehend that  it  is  our  desire  to  give  to  the 
Christians  absolute  freedom  to  follow  their  worship. 
But  if  such  absolute  freedom  be  given  by  us  to 
them,  thou  must  see  that  the  same  liberty  must 
be  given  to  all  others  who  wish  to  participate  in 
the  acts  of  their  particular  religion.  It  is  the 
manifest  sign  of  the  peace  of  our  times  that 
every  one  is  free  to  select  and  worship  the  divinity 
whom  he  prefers.  And  it  is  on  account  of  this 
that  we  desire  that  the  exercise  of  any  special 
worship  or  any  religion  should  not  suffer  the 
slightest  impediment.  .  .  .  Following  this  course, 
we  shall  obtain  that  divine  providence,  which 
has  on  so  many  occasions  been  favourable  to  us, 
will  continue  to  be  always  and  unchangeably 
propitious."  ^ 

Constantine's  decree  and  the  principle  that 
inspired  it  is  one  of  the  most  rational  acts 
that  ever  emanated  from  a  legislative  authority  ; 
we  may  almost  say  that  the  legislation  of  all  times 
and  all  nations  has  never  gone  further.  We  shall 
never  know  whence  Constantine  received  the 
inspiration  of  his  remarkable  decree,  which,  while 
permitting  Christianity  the  right  to  live  and  to 

^  Euseb.j  op.  at.,  375. 


392 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


exercise  its  particular  worship,  at  the  same  time 
refused  it  the  sanction  of  that  which  constituted 
its  essential  principle — the  sanction  of  an  absolute 
and  dogmatic  truth.  But  between  the  pagans 
true  to  the  idolatry  and  superstitions  of  paganism, 
and  the  Christians,  who  with  their  metaphysical 
religion  were  about  to  create  a  new  idolatry  and 
a  new  superstition,  there  must  possibly  have 
existed,  if  we  rightly  interpret  the  words  of 
Ammianus  Marcellinus,  a  party  fighting  under 
the  banner  of  a  rationally  theistic  Christianity. 
Ridiculing  the  theological  craze  of  Constantius, 
our  historian  says  that  he  mistook  a  stupid 
superstition  for  the  Christian  religion  absolutam 
et  simplicemr^  These  two  epithets,  which,  on  the 
lips  of  a  polytheist,  sounded  like  praise,  appeared 
to  refer  to  a  Christianity  without  dogmas  and 
without  rites,  tolerant  in  its  purely  theistic  affir- 
mation— a  Stoic  "  Christianity,  of  which  we  find 
the  first  expression  in  the  Octavius"  of  Minucius 
Felix.  Constantine  s  decree  was  probably  conceived 
in  this  atmosphere  of  rational  religion,  and  therefore 
opposed  to  the  invasion  of  dogmatism.  But  the 
readiness  with  which  Constantine  abandoned  this 
serene  and  enlightened  rationalism  proved  that 
the  decree  was  not  the  manifestation  of  a  con- 
viction formed  in  his  conscience,  but  the  effect  of 
the  counsel  of  others.  Therefore,  as  soon  as  it 
occurred  to  Constantine  that  Christianity  might,  in 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit.^  i.  263. 


JULIANAS  ACTIOxN  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  393 


his  hands,  become  a  powerful  instrument,  he  hastened 
to  supersede  his  admirable  decree,  and,  descending 
from  the  lofty  position  of  rational  theism,  conferred 
on  Christianity,  now  Orthodox  and  now  Arian,  the 
importance  of  a  real  and  absolute  State  religion, 
and  Christianity,  just  because  it  owed  its  efficacy 
to  a  dogmatic  truth,  rather  than  to  a  political 
necessity,  excluded  and  persecuted  all  other  re- 
ligions. Constantine  had  written :  "It  does  not 
matter  in  what  manner  men  pray,  so  long  as  they 
do  pray."  In  the  Christianity  which  he  had 
recognised,  the  manner  became  immediately  the 
condition  of  the  prayer.  He  who  did  not  pray 
in  the  prescribed  manner  must  not  pray  at  all. 
The  sons  of  Constantine  hastened  this  movement, 
which  received  its  solemn  and  final  sanction  from 
Theodosius. 

Now  Julian,  with  all  the  toleration  he  had 
declared  in  religious  matters,  could  not  consider  the 
subject  from  Constantine's  point  of  view,  because 
he  also  desired  a  religion  of  State,  and  such  for 
him  was  paganism,  to  which  he  gave  a  dogmatic 
value,  and  in  this  consisted  the  novelty  of  his 
attempt.  Julian  was  a  man  of  his  time,  and  he 
could  not  be  expected  to  revive  a  decree  which 
was  only  a  theoretic  declaration  of  principles,  and 
not  a  practically  applied  rule  of  conduct.  Julian 
attempted  to  oppose  to  Christianity,  recognised 
as  a  religion  essentially  dogmatic,  another  religion 
that  would  not  be  less  so.    From  this  arose  the 


394 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


necessity  of  preventing  a  diffusion  of  what  to  him 
was  an  error,  and,  above  all,  when  this  error  was 
to  be  propagated  by  means  furnished  by  the  State. 
The  School  Law  that  he  promulgated  was  inspired 
by  this  trend  of  ideas,  and  was  one  of  the  instruments 
that  he  wished  to  use  in  the  religious  conflict. 
We  shall  now  examine  it  attentively,  and  decide, 
if,  considering  the  convictions  by  which  he  was 
prompted,  we  can  really  accuse  him  of  having 
been  intolerant  and  tyrannical. 

In  order  clearly  to  define  the  terms  of  this 
dispute,  we  shall  begin  by  reproducing  literally  the 
famous  law  which  was  promulgated  by  Julian  in 
the  year  362,  a  few  months  before  he  left 
Constantinople  for  Antioch  to  prepare  for  that 
Persian  expedition  in  which  he  was  to  perish 
heroically.    The  law  is  as  follows  : — 

It  is  necessary  that  the  masters  of  the  schools 
should  be  most  perfect,  first  in  their  morals,  and 
then  in  their  eloquence.  Now,  as  it  is  impossible 
for  me  to  be  present  in  every  city,  I  order  that 
those  who  wish  to  be  teachers  must  not  suddenly 
and  without  preparation  assume  that  office — non 
repente  nec  temere  prosiliat  ad  hoc  munus — but, 
after  being  approved  by  the  authority  of  the 
Government,  they  shall  obtain  a  decree  of  the 
*  Curiales '  [we  should  say  nowadays  the 
Town  Council],  which  must  not  fail  to  meet 
the  approbation  of  the  best  citizens.    This  decree 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  395 


must  afterwards  be  referred  to  me,  for  examination, 
so  that  the  one  elected  should  present  himself  to 
the  school  of  the  city  deserving,  because  of  our 
judgment,  a  higher  title  of  honour — hoc  decretum 
ad  me  tractandum  referhtr  ut  altiore  qtiodam  honore 
nostro  judicio  shtdiis  civitattmi  accedat.'' 

We  must,  first  of  all,  remark  that  Julian's  law 
referred  exclusively  to  the  municipal  schools,  which 
were  none  other  than  the  public  schools.  In  the 
fourth  century,  official  teaching  was  almost  entirely 
assigned  to  the  cities,  and  they  maintained  the 
schools  at  their  expense,  nominating  the  teachers 
by  means  of  the  Council.  Of  this  we  have 
numberless  proofs,^  but  it  is  fully  demonstrated  in 
the  "  Autobiography "  of  Libanius,  in  which  the 
famous  Professor  of  Rhetoric  narrates  his  continual 
peregrinations  between  the  schools  of  Constanti- 
nople, Nicomedia,  and  Antioch,  and  his  Discourses, 
in  which  he  speaks  so  frequently  of  the  disputes 
incessantly  arising  between  the  city  authorities  and 
the  teachers,  to  whom  these  authorities  were 
always  in  arrears  with  their  stipends — a  condition 
of  affairs  by  no  means  peculiar  to  the  fourth  century. 
Furthermore,  every  one  knows  that  the  high-minded 
and  intelligent  youth  who  afterwards  was  known 
as  St.  Augustine,  came  to  Milan,  just  because  the 
city  authorities  having  to  elect  a  Professor  of 
Rhetoric,  and  not  finding  any  one  in  the  city  whom 
they  considered  worthy  to  fill  the  position,  addressed 

^  Sievers,  Das  Leben  des  Libanius. — Boissier,  La  Fin  du  Paganisme. 


396 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


themselves  to  Symmachus,  the  Prefect  of  Rome, 
"  ut  illi  civitati  rhetoricse  magister  provideretur," 
and  Symmachus  sent  them  Augustine. 

However,  in  the  fourth  century,  there  did  not 
exist  those  subtle  distinctions  of  competency  that 
so  greatly  complicate  the  organism  of  our  society ; 
likewise,  the  circumstance  that  the  schools  were  main- 
tained at  the  expense  of  the  cities,  and  the  elections 
made  by  the  municipal  authorities,  did  not  prevent 
them  from  being,  in  theory  and  de  jure,  at  the  same 
time  both  the  City  Schools  and  the  State  Schools  ; 
and  the  election  of  the  masters  descended,  so  to  speak, 
schematically,"  by  the  authority  of  the  Emperor. 
But  such  rights  had  fallen  into  disuse  and  oblivion, 
so  that  the  emperors  no  longer  occupied  themselves 
with  the  schools,  save  on  extraordinary  occasions, 
or  for  absolutely  exceptional  reasons.  Now  Julian, 
the  most  cultured  man  of  his  time,  wishing  to 
resume  the  guardianship  of  public  instruction, 
recalled  the  City  Councils  to  a  rigorous  exercise 
of  their  duties,  and  not  only  reaffirmed  his  right, 
but  also  exercised  it,  by  reserving  to  himself  the 
revision  of  all  the  elections  of  masters  made  by 
the  Councils. 

Thus  far,  therefore,  there  is  nothing  extraordi- 
nary, and  if,  in  this  law,  we  recognise  Julian's  mania 
for  interfering  in  everything,  which  was  decidedly 
one  of  his  defects,  in  itself  it  only  reveals  a  very 
laudable  interest  in  public  instruction.  But  this 
was  truly  a  case  where  the  sting  lies  in  the  tail. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  397 


The  Emperor  reserved  to  himself  the  revision  of 
all  nominations  of  teachers,  in  order,  according  to 
the  law,  to  invest  the  teachers  with  a  higher  title 
of  honour.  But  the  reason  of  this  was,  in  reality, 
not  so  innocent.  Under  the  appearance  of  a  general 
disposition,  there  existed  a  precise  and  well- 
determined  intention.  Julian  wished  to  attain  an  end 
that  was  very  much  more  important  to  him  than 
the  general  management  of  scholastic  administra- 
tion. The  revision  of  these  nominations,  which  he 
explicitly  arrogated  to  himself,  would  enable  him  to 
exclude  Christians  from  the  teaching  staff.  And, 
truly,  Julian  did  not  make  any  mystery  of  this. 
When  he  promulgated  the  law,  he  accompanied  it 
by  a  sort  of  circular  which  has  been  preserved 
intact,  and  in  it  we  clearly  discern  the  ends  to  which 
it  tended.  But  at  the  same  time  he  explains, 
comments,  and  justifies  it,  with  a  succession  of 
ingenious  and  subtle  reasons  which  are  well  worthy 
of  being  examined  and  discussed,  because  they  still 
preserve,  as  we  say  nowadays,  the  charm  of 
actuality." 

But  before  we  enter  into  an  examination  of 
Julian's  reasons,  we  must  see  first  what  were  the 
conditions  which  caused  the  Emperor  to  promulgate 
that  law.  A  little  more  than  half  a  century  had 
passed  since  Christianity  had  been  subjected  to  the 
terrible  persecution  of  Diocletian,  and  behold !  an 
emperor,  a  bitter  enemy  of  Christianity,  even 
more  bitter  than  Diocletian,  because  his  hatred 


398  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


was  inspired,  not  simply  by  reasons  of  State,  but 
also  by  philosophical  convictions,  desiring  to 
eradicate  the  new  religion,  finds  nothing  better  to 
do  than  to  close  the  public  schools  against  the 
Christians !  And  the  men  most  conspicuous  among 
the  Christians  rise  up  in  a  violent  and  fierce 
indignation  against  a  decree  that  must  have  seemed 
most  innocent  to  those  who  recalled  the  methods 
and  condemnations  resorted  to  by  the  preceding 
persecutors.  The  truth  is  that  Christianity,  in  the 
years  that  intervened  between  the  decree  of  Milan 
and  Julian's  accession  to  the  throne,  protected  by 
the  influence  of  Constantine  and  of  his  sons,  had 
become  all-powerful,  and  made  itself  master  of 
most  of  the  civilised  world.  If  the  rural  portions 
resisted  and  tenaciously  preserved  the  worship  of 
the  ancient  divinities  which  was  so  closely  united 
with  the  cultivation  of  the  fields,  the  cities,  above 
all  in  the  East,  were  for  the  greater  part 
Christianised,  and  the  struggles  between  Christians 
and  pagans  were  succeeded  by  intestine  contests 
between  Athanasians  and  Arians,  in  the  bosom 
of  Christianity  itself.  But  Christianity,  proclaimed 
as  the  dominant  and  recognised  religion  of 
Hellenic  civilisation,  had  necessarily  become 
Hellenised.  It  was  inevitable  in  the  atmos- 
phere of  a  society  which,  though  rapidly 
falling  into  decadence,  still  lived  in  the  memories 
and  habits  of  ancient  thought,  and  were  unable 
to  use  other  forms  excepting  those  transmitted 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  399 


to  them  by  the  ancients,  that  the  flower  of 
Palestine,  with  its  divine  Evangelical  simplicity, 
should  be  lost,  and  that  Christian  propaganda 
should  adopt  the  Hellenic  garb  of  those  very 
writers  whom,  from  a  religious  point  of  view,  it 
opposed.  This  process  of  evolution,  by  which 
Christianity  adapted  itself  to  Hellenic  culture,  in 
the  midst  of  which  it  had  to  live  and  spread, 
became,  in  a  short  time,  rapid  and  intense.  The 
schools  of  rhetoric  were  filled  with  Christian  pupils  ; 
Christian  masters  occupied  the  chairs  of  eloquence  : 
on  the  benches  of  the  School  of  Athens  itself, 
the  most  renowned  among  the  faculties  of  belles- 
lettres  in  the  fourth  century  were  seated,  side  by 
side  with  Prince  Julian,  a  Gregory  and  a  Basil ; 
the  Councils  that  followed  one  another  rapidly  in 
the  vain  attempt  to  adjust  the  terrible  dissensions 
that  rent  the  Church,  were  great  arenas  in  which 
eloquence  was  the  one  powerful  weapon  ;  in  short, 
Christianity  had  become  Hellenised  with  an 
impetuosity  and  celerity  which  explains  how,  in  this 
literary  revolution,  it  was  guided  by  the  instinct 
that  it  was  a  struggle  for  life.  And  we  will, 
furthermore,  say  that  Hellenic  culture  received 
new  life  from  it,  as  it  awakened  a  fresh  impulse 
no  longer  to  be  found  in  the  decrepit  civilisation  of 
the  ancient  world.  It  is  true  that  Greek  literature 
fell  into  decadence  more  slowly  than  was  the  case 
with  Latin  literature,  and,  even  in  the  fourth  century, 
emitted  some  few  flashes  of  light.    In  the  Discourses 


400 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  Libanius,  and  above  all  in  the  writings  of  Julian 
— his  Letters,  Satires,  and  certain  Orations — we 
occasionally  encounter  admirable  passages ;  but  in 
the  literature  of  Hellenised  Christianity  there  are 
bolder  flights,  and  the  vitality  is  far  more  intense. 
If  we  compare  one  of  the  discourses  of  Libanius, 
in  which  he  exalts  the  virtues  of  his  beloved  Julian 
with  either  of  the  scathing  orations  in  which 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus  inveighs  against  the  Emperor 
he  hated,  it  is  undeniable  that,  even  from  a  literary 
point  of  view,  the  victory  must  be  assigned  to  the 
Christian  disputant  rather  than  to  the  pagan 
rhetorician.  And  if  we  recall  that  numerous 
company  of  ecclesiastical  orators  and  writers  from 
Athanasius  to  Augustine,  who  have  filled  the  fourth 
century  with  their  fiery  eloquence,  we  immediately 
recognise  that  Hellenism,  entering  as  the  constituent 
element  of  their  work,  became  the  indispensable 
instrument  of  Christian  preaching. 

Julian,  therefore,  found  himself  confronted  with  a 
religion  most  powerfully  constituted,  just  because  it 
had  become  Hellenised  by  recasting  its  elements  in 
the  ancient  moulds.  Even  if  he  had  so  wished,  he 
could  not  have  opposed  it  by  means  of  persecution. 
Roman  persecution,  from  Nero  to  Diocletian,  had 
been  naught  else  but  a  coercitio,  a  police  persecu- 
tion, a  measure  of  public  safety  against  a  sect  that 
they  believed  to  be  dangerous.  But  such  a  proceed- 
ing could  only  be  instituted  by  a  majority  against  a 
minority.    The  day  in  which  the  minority  became 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGALNST  CHRISTIAxMTY  401 


in  its  turn  the  majority,  the  positions  were  reversed, 
and  the  persecuted  became  the  persecutors,  and 
this  had  already  taken  place  under  the  sons  of 
Constantine.  Inasmuch  as  Julian  could  no  longer 
persecute  the  Christians,  who,  if  not  the  majority, 
at  least  formed  half  of  his  subjects,  he  conceived 
the  thought  of  converting  them  by  kindness,  of 
persuading  them,  by  his  example  and  arguments, 
to  return  to  the  ancient  customs.  With  this  idea 
he  attempted  to  organise  a  pagan  clergy  that 
would,  by  its  virtues  and  zeal,  prove  itself  superior 
to  the  Christian  clergy,  and  he  himself  wrote  theo- 
logical discourses  and  treatises,  composed  fervent 
prayers,  and  issued,  if  I  may  use  the  word, 
"pastorals"  replete  with  good  advice,  and  re- 
vealing a  tendency  which  nowadays  we  might 
call  bigoted.  Julian  actually  possessed  all  the 
necessary  requisites  of  a  Christian.  But  the 
terrible  vicissitudes  of  his  childhood,  the  continual 
menace  of  death  to  which  he  was  subjected  in  his 
early  youth,  the  Hellenic  education  which  he  had 
received  in  Constantinople  from  his  first  teacher, 
the  influence  of  the  masters  with  whom,  later, 
he  lived  in  Nicomedia ;  the  disgraceful  spectacle 
presented  by  the  court  of  Constantius,  a  court 
exclusively  Christian  ;  the  natural  antagonism  to 
his  cousin,  in  whom  he  saw  the  murderer  of  his 
father,  his  brother,  and  his  other  relatives  ;  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  Arian  clergy  that  surrounded  him  ; 
and,  finally,  his  deep-seated  passion  for  Greek  art 

VOL.  II. — 6 


402 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


and  culture,  made  him  insensible  to  the  attractions 
that  Christianity  might  have  exercised  over  a  spirit 
so  noble  and  sincere  as  that  of  the  young  Emperor. 
Unequalled  in  his  knowledge  of  Christian  literature, 
which  he  scrutinised  with  an  unfriendly  eye,  Julian 
set  himself  the  task  of  persuading  the  world  that 
Christianity  was  founded  on  a  false  basis,  and  that 
he  intended  to  lead  it  back  to  polytheism,  but  to  a 
polytheism  metaphysically  reformed  by  means  of  the 
symbolic  doctrines  of  Neo-Platonism,  and  governed, 
in  respect  of  its  morals  and  discipline,  in  accord- 
ance with  those  rules  which  he  drew  from  the  source 
of  the  very  religion  which  he  wished  to  demolish. 

Carried  away  by  the  theurgic  metaphysics  which 
had  been  instituted  by  lamblichus  and  his  pupils, 
Julian  believed  in  the  truth  of  polytheism  trans- 
formed into  a  mystical  symbolism,  and  thus  the 
tales  of  Hellenic  mythology  were  for  him  a  series 
of  sacred  symbols.  Homer  and  Hesiod  were  to 
him  what  the  Bible  was  to  the  Christians.  He 
was  therefore  convinced  that  those  books,  read  and 
studied  with  good-will  and  without  adverse  pre- 
judice, must  exercise  the  most  irresistible  influence, 
and  prove  the  most  powerful  instruments  of  recon- 
version to  the  ancient  beliefs.  But,  in  spite  of  this, 
he  was  forced  to  admit  that  the  reading  of  these 
books  did  not  appear  to  oppose  any  obstacle 
to  the  invasion  of  Christianity.  What  could 
possibly  be  the  reason  of  this  ?  Julian  replied  : 
Because    in    the     public     schools     the  sacred 


JULIANS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  403 


books  of  polytheism  are  placed  in  the  hands  of 
Christian  teachers,  who  either  do  not  comprehend 
them,  or  contradict  them  by  their  conduct  outside 
the  school,  or  make  them  the  subject  of  derision 
and  abuse.  He  therefore  thought  that  one  of  the 
most  efficacious  as  well  as  most  necessary  precau- 
tions that  he  could  take  would  be  to  protect  the 
children  from  the  effects  of  this  perversion,  and  he, 
therefore,  decided  to  prevent  the  Christian  teachers 
from  holding  professorships  in  the  schools.  To 
arrive  at  this  end,  he  promulgated  his  law,  by  which 
no  one  could  become  a  teacher  in  the  public  schools 
unless  they  were  first  confirmed  in  their  offices  by 
the  Emperor,  which  was  as  much  as  to  say  that  no 
Christian  would  receive  the  necessary  approbation. 
The  natural  consequence  of  Julian's  decree,  if 
rigorously  applied,  would  have  been  to  rebarbarise 
Christianity,  by  wresting  from  it  those  literary 
adornments  with  w^hich  it  presented  itself  to  the 
civilised  world,  and,  by  means  of  which,  it  gained 
converts  to  its  doctrines.  It  is  easy,  therefore,  to 
understand  how,  in  the  fourth  century,  Christianity 
rose  up  in  arms  against  this  law,  considering  it  the 
deadliest  offence  and  the  gravest  blow  to  which  it 
had  ever  been  subjected.  If  Julian  had  renewed 
Diocletian's  persecution,  Christianity  would  have 
fearlessly  confronted  it,  knowing  that  it  would  have 
found  in  persecution  a  renewed  strength.  But 
Julian's  move,  by  which  he  attempted  to  wrest  from 
them  their  great  instrument  of  propaganda,  filled 


404 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


them  with  indignation  and  dismay.  Certainly  St. 
Paul,  for  whom  the  whole  wisdom  of  the  world  was 
naught  else  but  foolishness,  would  have  smiled  at 
such  a  law.  But  Christianity,  as  we  have  seen, 
had  transformed  itself;  it  had  become  a  worldly 
power,  and  was  obliged  to  adopt  worldly  weapons, 
and  of  these  Hellenic  culture  was  one  of  the  most 
indispensable.  "  Whence  " —  exclaims  Gregory  — 
"  whence,  O  most  stupid  and  wicked  of  men,  came 
to  thee  the  thought  of  depriving  the  Christians  of 
the  use  of  eloquence  ?  Was  it  Mercury,  as  thou 
thyself  hast  said,  who  put  it  into  thy  head  ?  Was 
it  the  evil  demons  ?  .  .  .  We  only,  thou  hast  said, 
we  only  have  the  right  to  eloquence,  we  who  speak 
Greek,  we  who  adore  the  gods.  To  you  ignorance 
and  churlishness,  to  you  for  whom  all  wisdom  is 
encompassed  in  the  word,  I  believe  !  "  ^  Socrates, 
the  ecclesiastical  historian,  a  measured  and  judicious 
writer,  although  recognising  that  Julian  did  not 
indulge  in  any  violent  and  bloody  persecutions,  yet 
considers  him  a  persecutor,  because,  he  says,  by 
this  law  he  wished  to  prevent  the  Christians  from 
sharpening  their  tongues  so  as  to  be  able  to  reply 
to  the  arguments  of  their  adversaries.^  But  the 
most  symptomatic  judgment  is  that  of  Ammianus 
Marcellinus.  He,  who  was  no  Christian,  who  felt 
the  greatest  admiration  for  Julian,  with  whom  he 
had  fought,  considered  this  decree  among  the  few 
reprehensible  things  committed  by  his  emperor, 

^  Greg.  Naz,,  op.  cit.^  Orat.  iii.  97.  ^  Socrat.,  op.  cit..,  151. 


JULIANAS  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  405 


and  judges  it  as — an  inclement  decree,  that  should 
be  consigned  to  perennial  silence — obruendtim 
perenni  silentio!'  ^  Ammianus  Marcellinus  was  an 
expert  soldier,  an  honest  and  impartial  narrator, 
but  a  man  of  mediocre  intelligence,  who  could  take 
no  interest  in  religious  disputes.  He  was  not  a 
Christian,  but  neither  was  he  a  decided  and  zealous 
pagan.  He  was  perfectly  neutral,  and,  with  his 
practical  common  sense,  deplored  that  a  man  so 
accomplished  and  brave  as  Julian  should  con- 
descend to  embroil  himself  in  theological  disputes, 
and  dissipate,  in  these  extravagant  superstitions, 
the  wonderful  talents  with  which  he  was  endowed. 
His  judgment  is  most  interesting,  as  it  cannot  be 
the  fruit  of  personal  reflection,  but  rather  the  echo 
of  public  opinion,  which  was,  to  a  great  extent, 
influenced  by  the  Christians,  who  were  so  energetic 
and  numerous  as  to  obtain  the  adherence  even  of 
a  lukewarm  pagan. 

The  condemnation  hurled  by  the  contemporary 
Christians  against  Julian's  decree  was  confirmed  in 
the  following  centuries,  and  became  a  settled 
verdict,  and  even  to  this  day  constitutes  the 
principal  accusation  against  that  Imperial  Utopian. 
But  can  this  condemnation — certainly  justifiable 
from  the  point  of  view  of  Christian  apologetics — be 
sustained,  if  considered  with  the  serene  impartiality 
of  the  critic  from  a  purely  objective  point  of  view  ? 
This  is  the  question   I   wish   to  examine.  We 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit.,  i.  289. 


40 G  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


should  put  ourselves  in  Julian's  place,  and  not 
forget  that,  he  being  convinced  of  the  perfection  of 
polytheism,  wished  to  lead  the  world  back  to  its 
worship.  It  was  therefore  only  natural  that  he 
should  seek  the  most  efficacious  means  to  resist 
the  invasion  of  his  enemy.  As  far  as  this  goes,  no 
one,  it  seems  to  me,  could  condemn  him.  The  con- 
demnation would  not  be  justified  unless  it  could 
be  proved  that  the  means  chosen  were  unjust,  or 
that  while  employing  the  legitimate  means  within 
his  control,  he  failed  to  give  due  consideration  to 
the  opinion  of  others,  or  exceeded  the  limits  of  his 
authority. 

Julian  has  anticipated  this  accusation,  and  has 
written  his  circular  to  refute  it.  The  temperance 
displayed  by  his  words  and  reasoning  has  only 
served  to  gain  him  the  reputation  of  a  hypocrite. 
This  unhappy  Julian  never  succeeded  in  satisfying 
any  one.  If  he  gave  vent  to  his  natural  indigna- 
tion, he  was  a  tyrant ;  if  he  reasoned  tranquilly,  he 
was  a  hypocrite.  The  truth  is  that  Julian  was  a 
man  possessed  with  a  passion  for  reasoning,  one  of 
those  men  who  examine  and  re-examine  themselves 
to  discover  the  reasons  that  prompt  their  actions, 
and  are  only  content  when  they  have  convinced, 
not  only  others,  but  also  themselves,  of  the 
rationality  of  their  conduct.  In  the  case  we  have 
now  under  consideration,  there  was  no  necessity  for 
him  to  be  a  hypocrite.    Nothing  could  be  opposed 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  407 


to  the  execution  of  his  law,  of  which  he  was  not 
obliged  to  render  account  to  any  one.  And, 
besides,  his  reasons,  whatever  they  might  be,  had 
no  value  in  the  eyes  of  the  Christians,  and  were 
unnecessary  for  the  pagans.  But  he  earnestly 
desired  to  establish  his  law  on  a  rational  basis,  of 
which  he  gives  the  outline  in  his  famous  circular. 

Julian's  fundamental  affirmation,  from  which  he 
develops  the  thread  of  his  argument,  is  that  there 
should  be  no  contradiction  between  a  man's 
teaching  and  his  faith  and  conduct,  and,  therefore, 
that  it  was  not  possible  to  permit  these  masters 
who  were  not  pagans  to  adopt  in  their  teachings 
those  books  that  were  the  sacred  texts  of 
paganism.  This,  in  Julian's  opinion,  constituted 
an  absolute  moral  monstrosity. 

The  teachers  who  were  to  inspire  their  pupils 
with  an  admiration  for  Homer,  Hesiod,  and  the 
other  authors  of  antiquity,  should  demonstrate  in 
their  daily  lives  their  belief  in  the  piety  and 
wisdom  of  these  authors.  If  they  did  not  possess 
such  convictions,  they  must  recognise  that,  in  their 
anxiety  to  obtain  their  salaries,  they  were  teaching 
that  which  they  believed  false.  But  let  us  follow, 
step  by  step,  Julian's  argument.  We  believe  " — 
he  writes — ''that  good  teaching  does  not  consist  in 
the  harmony  of  words  and  speech,  but  rather  in  a 
disposition  of  the  mind  that  has  a  true  conception 
of  good  and  evil,  of  honesty  and  dishonesty.  He, 
therefore,  who  teaches  in  one  way  and  thinks  in 


408 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


another,  is  not  only  far  from  being  a  good  teacher, 
but  is  also  far  from  being  an  honest  man.  In 
small  things  this  disagreement  between  one's  con- 
victions and  one's  words  is  an  evil  that  may  be 
tolerated,  but  it  is,  nevertheless,  an  evil.  But  in 
matters  of  supreme  importance,  when  a  man  thinks 
one  way  and  teaches  exactly  the  contrary  of  what 
he  thinks,  his  conduct  is  similar  to  that  of  the 
merchants — not  the  honest,  but  the  depraved  ones 
— who  recommend  as  highly  as  possible  the  wares 
that  are  the  worse,  deceiving  and  alluring  by  their 
praise  those  to  whom  they  wish  to  give  over  that 
which  is  spoiled." 

Julian  here  puts  his  fundamental  principle, 
namely,  that  the  Christians,  having  convictions 
absolutely  diverse  from  those  of  the  authors  of 
antiquity,  could  not  honestly  attempt  to  discuss 
them,  because,  in  good  faith,  they  could  not  exhort 
their  pupils  to  admire  and  follow  their  doctrines  : 
unless,  like  the  dishonest  merchants,  they  seek 
to  deceive  the  buyers  and  to  sell  them  one 
merchandise  for  another.  In  order  to  avoid  this 
deplorable  state  of  affairs,  Julian  then  continues  : 
"It  is  necessary  that  all  those  who  devote  them- 
selves to  teaching  should  have  good  morals  [and 
by  "good  morals"  he  means  the  public  pro- 
fession of  paganism]  and  experience  in  their  souls 
sentiments  that  do  not  differ  from  those  they 
express  in  public."  This  is  the  most  important 
point  in  Julian's  argument.    He  affirms,  as  ab- 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  409 


solutely  admissible,  the  principle  that  the  teacher 
of  a  school  has  no  right  to  teach  that  which  does 
not  accord  with  the  public  feeling,  and  deduces 
from  this  the  consequence  that  the  teacher  should 
not,  in  his  conduct  and  in  his  personal  convictions, 
fall  into  contradiction  with  himself.  "  And  this" — 
continues  Julian — "  is  still  far  more  important  for 
those  who  are  entrusted  with  the  teaching  of  the 
young  and  with  explaining  the  writings  of  the 
ancients,  whether  they  be  rhetoricians,  grammarians, 
or,  still  better,  sophists,  as  these  more  than  the  others 
are  masters  not  only  of  eloquence,  but  of  morals.  .  .  . 
Certainly" — continues  Julian,  with  a  bitter  irony 
— I  give  them  all  praise  for  this  their  aspiration 
towards  these  the  highest  teachings,  but  I  would 
praise  them  more  if  they  did  not  contradict  and 
condemn  themselves,  thinking  one  thing  and 
teaching  the  other.  But  how  is  it?  For  Homer, 
Hesiod,  Demosthenes,  Thucydides,  Isocrates, 
Lysias,  the  gods  are  the  directing  power  of  all 
education.  And  did  not  some  of  these  believe 
themselves  to  be  ministers  of  Mercury,  and  others 
of  the  Muses?  It,  therefore,  seems  to  me  absurd 
that  those  who  explain  their  works  should  not 
worship  the  gods  they  worshipped.  But  if  this 
seems  absurd  to  me,  I  do  not  say  on  this 
account  that  they  should  dissimulate  before  their 
scholars.  I  leave  them  free  not  to  teach  that  which 
they  cannot  believe  right,  but,  if  they  wish  to  teach, 
they  must  first  teach  by  example,  and  then  con- 


410  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


vince  their  pupils  that  neither  Homer  nor  Hesiod, 
nor  any  of  those  others  whom  they  have  commented 
upon,  and  of  whom,  outside  the  school,  they  condemn 
the  impiety,  the  stupidity,  and  the  errors  against 
God,  were  not  such  as  they  represented  them  to  be." 

Julian  insists  on  the  necessity  of  an  accord 
between  the  external  conduct  of  the  teacher  and 
his  teachings  in  the  school.  The  teacher,  by  his 
exercises  of  devotion,  should  demonstrate  that  his 
belief  in  the  gods  is  the  same  as  that  of  the 
authors  from  whom  he  reads  to  his  pupils.  If  he 
fail  to  do  this,  he  implicitly  condemns  the  authors 
whom  he  should  teach  his  pupils  to  admire,  and 
in  this  case,  subtly  continues  the  Imperial 
logician,  since  the  teachers  live  by  means  of  the 
money  earned  from  the  writings  of  these  authors, 
they  must  admit  that  they  are  immoderately 
greedy  of  a  shameful  gain,  and  ready  to  do  any- 
thing for  the  sake  of  a  few  drachmas." 

But  Julian  does  not  allude  exclusively  to  the 
teachers  who  were  really  Christian.  He  supposes 
that  there  are  some  who,  pagans  at  heart,  but 
fearing  the  emperors  who  preceded  him  on  the 
throne,  and  for  reasons  of  opportunism,"  neglected 
the  worship  of  the  gods.  To  these  he  says : 
"  Certainly,  until  the  present  time  there  were 
reasons  why  one  did  not  care  to  enter  the  temples, 
and  the  evil  by  which  we  were  from  all  parts 
threatened  rendered  pardonable  the  concealment 
of  our  honest  opinion  concerning  the  gods.  But 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  411 


now  that  the  gods  have  given  us  Hberty,  it  is 
absurd  that  men  should  give  proofs  of  that  which 
they  do  not  consider  good.  If,  therefore,  they  are 
convinced  of  the  wisdom  of  those  of  whom  they 
are  the  expounders,  let  them  rival  these  in  de- 
votion to  the  gods.  But  if,  instead,  they  are  con- 
vinced that  they  have  erred  in  their  conception 
of  divinity,  in  such  a  case,  let  them  enter  into  the 
churches  of  the  Galileans,  and  explain  Matthew 
and  Luke,  who  have  made  it  a  law  that  those 
who  believe  in  them  should  abstain  from  our 
sacred  ceremonies." 

We  must  here  pause  a  moment  before  we  give 
the  final  words  of  the  document.  It  is  most  curious, 
and  a  decided  proof  of  the  prejudice  that  taints 
all  judgments  in  regard  to  Julian,  that,  after  such 
a  clear  and  explicit  declaration,  his  law  should 
be  accused  of  religious  intolerance.  It  could  only 
have  been  considered  intolerant  if  he  had  prohibited 
Christian  propaganda,  or  put  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  their  preaching  and  in  the  diffusion  of  Christian 
literature.  But  he  says  just  the  opposite.  He 
said  that  the  Christian  churches  were  open,  and 
exhorts  their  teachers  to  enter  them  and  read  with 
the  faithful  the  books  of  their  doctrines.  When  we 
think  that  Julian  was  most  ardent  in  his  devotion 
to  the  cause  of  paganism,  that  he  was  an  all- 
powerful  emperor  and  opposed  Christianity  for 
dogmatic  reasons,  we  are  forced  to  recognise,  not 
only  that  he  was  not  intolerant,  but  that  he  gave 


412 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


a  truly  marvellous  example  of  tolerance,  and  in  this 
respect  he  clasps  hands  with  the  modern  world, 
reaching  over  the  Middle  Ages  and  the  intervening 
centuries.  This  affirmation  of  absolute  tolerance 
is  also  evident  in  the  last  words  of  his  circular. 
**  For  my  part" — exclaims  Julian,  addressing  him- 
self to  the  Christians — "  I  would  desire  that  your 
ears  and  your  tongues  be  regenerated,  as  you 
would  say,  through  that  doctrine  in  which  I  hope 
that  I  myself,  and  all  those  who  think  and  work 
in  accord  with  me,  may  always  participate.  This 
is  a  general  law  for  all  teachers  and  educators. 
But  none  of  the  youths  who  wish  to  enter  the 
schools  will  be  excluded,  since  it  would  not  be 
reasonable  to  close  the  right  path  to  children,  who 
do  not  yet  know  in  which  direction  to  turn,  as 
also  it  would  not  be  right  to  lead  them,  by  fear 
and  against  their  will,  to  follow  the  national  customs, 
although  it  might  appear  lawful  to  cure  them 
against  their  will,  as  is  done  with  the  insane. 
But  tolerance  is  established  for  all  who  suffer 
from  this  disease,  and  the  ignorant  we  must  in- 
struct, but  not  punish."  ^ 

Such  words  naturally  confute  the  accusation 
that  the  ecclesiastical  historians  have  advanced 
against  Julian,  i.e.,  that  he  prohibited  Christian 
youths  from  frequenting  the  schools  in  which 
Greek  literature  was  taught.  Julian  explicitly  says 
that  the  law  only  refers  to  the  teachers,  and  that 

^  Julian.,  06.  cit.,  544  sq. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  413 


the  youths  are  free  to  go  where  they  please.  And, 
after  all,  it  would  appear  absolutely  inconceivable 
that  a  man  like  Julian,  who  had  such  faith  in  the 
persuasive  eloquence  of  the  ancient  writers,  would 
willingly  preclude  the  Christian  youths  from  that 
which  seemed  to  him  the  most  direct  and  sure  way 
of  obtaining  their  conversion. 

Having  cleared  the  question  from  these  accusa- 
tions based  upon  equivocation,  let  us  proceed  to 
examine  Julian's  fundamental  argument,  in  order 
to  analyse  its  value.  He  starts  from  the  premise 
that  there  should  be  a  perfect  accord  between 
the  convictions  and  teachings  of  a  man,  and  such 
a  premise  must  be  absolutely  approved  by  any  one 
who  is  reasonable  and  conscientious.  From  this 
premise  he  deduces  the  conclusion  that  those 
teachers  who  did  not  believe  in  the  gods  wor- 
shipped by  Homer  and  the  other  ancient  writers, 
should  not  read  and  explain  these  authors  to  their 
pupils.  Nowadays  we  smile  at  this  conclusion, 
deduced  from  a  rightful  principle,  because  it 
would  be  impossible  to  take  the  mythology 
of  Homer  seriously.  We  admire  the  style  and 
art  of  Homer  and  Virgil,  and  are  affected  by  the 
human  part  of  their  poems,  but  to  the  mythological 
part  we  never  give  a  thought,  except  so  far  as  it 
interests  the  critic  as  a  literary  or  historical  docu- 
ment. But  we  must  not  forget  that  Julian  found 
himself  in  very  different  conditions.  In  his  time  it 
was  still  possible  to  believe,  and  men  did  effectively 


414 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


believe,  in  the  truth  of  polytheism  :  the  struggle 
between  polytheism  and  Christianity  still  raged  in- 
tensely, and  he  had  taken  in  hand  the  cause  of  pagan- 
ism, from  the  wish  to  restore  the  ancient  worship. 
For  him  the  books  of  polytheistic  culture  were  really 
sacred  texts,  and  it  was  quite  natural  that  he  should 
wish  them  to  be  respected.  Now,  two  cases  might 
present  themselves  :  either  the  Christians,  explain- 
ing in  the  schools  the  texts  of  the  ancient  writers, 
might  use  them  as  an  argument  and  an  oppor- 
tunity to  oppose  polytheism,  which  was  the  fund- 
amental doctrine  of  these  texts,  and  thus  offend 
the  religion  that  the  State  and  the  cities  recognise, 
with  the  arms  that  this  very  State  and  cities  have 
placed  in  their  hands  ;  or  the  Christians,  in  order 
to  retain  their  position  as  teachers,  for  greed  of  gain 
(through  being,  as  Julian  says,  alaxpoKepSiaTaroi), 
might  profess  one  doctrine  in  the  schools  and 
practise  another  outside,  thus  presenting  a  spectacle 
that  seemed  to  Julian  inconsistent  and  immoral. 

Here  we  will  note  a  curious  circumstance : 
the  regulations  which  govern  religious  instruc- 
tion in  the  Italian  elementary  schools,  and  are 
the  work  of  the  subtle  and  well-balanced  mind  of 
Aristide  Gabelli,^  were  actually  inspired  by  that  same 
principle  which  was  enunciated  for  the  first  time  by 
Julian.  What  did  Gabelli  say  ?  He  said  that  from 
the  moment  the  Catechism  was  taught  in  the  schools, 

1  Aristide  Gabelli  (i  830-1 891),  celebrated  pedagogue  and  lawyer. 
—Translator's  Note. 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  415 

its  teaching  ought  to  be  entrusted  to  persons  who 
believed  the  doctrines  they  interpreted,  and  in 
the  absence  of  these,  to  the  only  teacher  really 
competent,  the  priests,  although  it  is  decidedly  a 
subject  of  discussion  whether  the  Catechism  should 
be  permitted  in  the  schools,  but  once  admitted,  it 
would  be  repugnant  to  every  honest  conscience  to 
permit  it  to  be  taught  by  those  who  might  make 
it  a  subject  of  confutation  or  derision.  Now,  Julian 
said  exactly  the  same  thing.  "  I  do  not  wish,"  he 
said,  *'that  the  books  in  which  every  page  speaks 
of  the  gods  of  Greece  and  of  Rome,  in  which  I, 
and  half  the  civilised  world,  still  believe,  should  fall 
into  the  hands  of  teachers  interested  in  demolish- 
ing the  faith  in  these  gods."  It  seems,  in  truth, 
difficult  to  find  a  persecutor  more  reasonable  or 
more  considerate. 

Undoubtedly,  for  the  Christians  of  the  fourth 
century,  the  true  question  was  more  complicated  and 
serious,  from  the  circumstance  that  the  books  that 
Julian  wished  to  take  out  of  their  hands  were  the  only 
texts  which  could  serve  for  educational  purposes. 
The  ancient  world  did  not  know  what  science,  in  the 
modern  sense  of  the  word,  was.  The  teaching  in 
the  schools  consisted  only  of  rhetoric,  by  which 
the  pupils  learnt  how  to  become  orators,  how  to 
employ  those  literary  forms  by  which  thought,  be  it 
political,  legal,  or  religious,  should  be  clothed  so  as 
to  make  it  acceptable  and  comprehensible.  This 
art  could  only  be  acquired  by  studying  the  examples 


416 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  ancient  literature,  and  the  prohibition  to  Christian 
teachers  to  use  this  literature  was  tantamount  to 
excluding  them,  in  the  most  absolute  manner,  from 
public  teaching.  And  thus  teachers  of  great  fame, 
as  Prseresius  in  Athens  and  Simplicianus  in  Rome, 
not  wishing  to  commit  apostasy,  had  been  obliged 
to  retire  from  their  chairs.  Now,  it  is  certain  that 
Julian  must  have  been  greatly  pleased  by  this 
circumstance,  that  enabled  him  to  arrive  at  his 
aim  of  barbarising  Christianity.  It  was  a  most 
fortunate  event  for  him,  and  one  which  he 
fully  had  the  right  to  use  as  a  lawful 
weapon,  that  from  the  principle  of  intellectual 
honesty  which  he  had  propounded,  should  be 
derived  consequences  of  such  a  substantial  import- 
ance. He  confined  the  Christians  to  the  study  of 
the  true  texts  of  Christianity,  and  reserved  for  the 
pagans  the  books  that  were  truly  pagan.  A 
Christian  emperor  would  not  have  permitted  the 
Gospels  to  be  explained  and  held  up  to  derision 
by  a  pagan  teacher;  Julian  could  not  allow  the 
Christian  teachers  to  treat  Homer  and  Hesiod  in 
the  same  manner.  In  all  this,  religious  tolerance 
had  not  been  wounded  in  the  slightest  manner. 

But  if  Julian  did  not  offend  religious  tolerance 
with  his  law,  as  it  was  interpreted  by  him,  can  it 
be  said  that  he  did  not  interfere  with  the  liberty  of 
instruction  ?  The  question  is  a  most  delicate  one, 
and  cannot  be  settled  by  overwhelming  him  with 
eloquent  denunciations,  after  the  manner  of  the 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  417 


ancient  disputants,  because  the  problem  involves 
the  great  question  of  the  rights  and  duties  of  the 
State — a  problem  that  is  still  a  subject  of  dis- 
cussion, and  v^ill  continue  to  be  such  as  long  as 
social  order  exists.  We  must,  in  the  first  place, 
remember  that  Julian's  law  referred  to  the  city- 
schools,  v^hich  represented  public  teaching  main- 
tained at  the  expense  of  the  cities,  and,  therefore, 
by  the  financial  and  administrative  organisation  of 
the  State,  it  was  really  State  teaching,  proceeding 
directly  from  the  authority  of  the  Emperor.  There- 
fore Julian  affirmed  that  the  teachers  should  not 
have  opinions  in  opposition  to  those  of  the  State. 
He  did  not  interfere  with  those  who  taught  in  the 
Christian  schools,  but  he  did  not  admit  that 
Christian  teachers  should  enter  the  schools  of  a 
polytheistic  State,  as  they  might  attempt  to  under- 
mine its  basis.  Julian  reasons  thus  :  "  The  State  is 
an  organism  created  to  exercise  certain  functions. 
It  would  therefore  be  absurd  that  the  State  should 
be  willing  to  permit  these  functions  to  be  exercised 
by  those  whose  aim  is  to  injure  it ;  this  would 
amount  to  suicide."  This  process  of  reasoning  is  so 
vital  that,  even  in  our  days,  with  the  modifications 
necessitated  by  the  different  conditions  of  culture, 
it  still  exists,  and  arguments  are  found  to  sustain  it. 
It  is  true  that  modern  thought,  living  in  the  milieu 
of  scientific  civilisation — that  glorious  achievement 
of  our  century — has  promulgated,  as  one  of  its 
fundamental  canons,  that  intelligence  is  absolute 

VOL.  II.  —  7 


418  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


mistress  of  itself,  and,  therefore,  in  science,  the  State 
cannot  impose  its  opinion  on  others,  and  should  leave 
the  field  open  to  the  discussion  and  diffusion  of  all 
doctrines.  There  cannot  exist  a  State  science  of 
physics,  astronomy,  or  philology.  But  it  might  be 
said,  this  is  all  right  and  true  as  far  as  positive  science 
is  concerned,  but  the  aspect  changes  when  we  con- 
sider those  doctrines  that  directly  influence  the  moral 
tendencies  of  the  individual  and  determine  his  actions. 
The  State,  just  because  it  is  an  organism  destined 
to  exercise  certain  functions,  is  likewise  based  on  a 
moral  doctrine.  Therefore,  being  also  constrained 
to  enter  as  a  combatant  into  the  contest  of  ideas,  it 
cannot  be  asked  to  open  its  doors  to  an  enemy  and 
consign  to  it  the  arms  of  defence  which  it  has  in 
hand.  The  State  has  not  only  the  right,  but  the 
duty,  to  defend  its  organisation.  And  could  it 
possibly,  while  leaving  a  free  hand  to  its  enemies, 
fetter  its  own,  and  confide  the  exercise  of  its 
functions  to  those  who  wish  to  destroy  it  ? 

All  these  reasons  are  tacitly  understood  in 
Julian's  law,  and  give  more  prominence  and  power 
to  the  action  of  the  State  in  matters  pertaining 
to  public  instruction,  and  are  even  to-day  of  such 
importance  that  in  France  they  suggest  a  law 
proposed  by  the  Minister  Waldeck- Rousseau, 
to  close  the  Government  Civil  Service  against  those 
who  have  not  received  instruction  in  the  State 
schools,  and,  better  still,  the  law  just  voted  by  the 
French    Parliament,  which   denies   the   right  of 


JULIAN'S  ACTION  AGAINST  CHRISTIANITY  419 


teaching  to  those  religious  corporations  which  have 
not  obtained  a  special  authorisation.  Even  in  this 
case,  once  more  we  see  demonstrated,  in  the  most 
luminous  manner,  the  irony  of  human  things  : 
reactionaries  and  radicals  mutually  reproach  each 
other  as  to  their  choice  in  their  methods  of  govern- 
ment, when  these  methods  turn  to  their  detriment, 
but  they  do  not  hesitate  to  make  use  of  the  same 
methods  when  they  tend  to  their  advantage.  Julian 
was  loath  that  the  youths  who  frequented  the  public 
schools  of  his  time  should  be  educated  by  teachers 
necessarily  inimical  to  the  pagan  State  that  he 
wished  to  preserve.  The  French  Premier  does 
not  wish  the  Civil  Service  of  the  Republican 
State  he  governs  to  be  accessible  to  youths  edu- 
cated in  those  schools  where  they  are  taught  to 
hate  and  plot  against  the  Republic.  Against  this 
French  law  there  arises  a  cry  of  protest  similar  to 
that  raised  against  Julian's  law,  seventeen  centuries 
ago.  However,  each  of  these  laws  has  a  rational 
basis.  They  may  be  considered  inopportune,  but 
they  do  not  seem  to  us  tyrannical.  Such  would  be  a 
law  that  sought  to  stifle  the  free  expansion  of  ideas  ; 
but  this  cannot  be  said  of  a  law  by  which  the  State 
seeks  to  prevent  itself  from  being  destroyed  by 
those  adverse  ideas  which  are  even  being  pro- 
pagated at  its  expense.  The  teacher  or  official 
in  the  school  or  the  office,  who,  by  word  or  deed, 
acts  against  the  State  from  which  he  receives  his 
employment  and  his  salary,  presents  a  most  immoral 


420 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


spectacle.  The  State  has  the  right  of  putting  an 
end  to  this.  But  this  right  is  never,  of  course, 
recognised  by  those  who  consider  themselves 
offended,  because,  in  questions  of  the  moral  order, 
judgment  is  necessarily  obscured  by  passion,  and 
there  is  nothing  like  playing  the  victim  to  persuade 
others  and  ourselves  that  we  are  in  the  right.  And 
this  is  a  consideration  that  should  prevent  those 
who  have  the  responsibility  of  power  from  making 
provisions  which,  although  rational  and  justifiable 
in  themselves,  may  often  bring  about  results  exactly 
opposite  to  those  expected.  The  Emperor  Julian 
had  not  the  slightest  intention  of  making  victims, 
but,  like  many  others  after  him,  he  had  the  mis- 
fortune of  appearing  to  do  so,  and  that  has  given 
to  those  who  wish  to  defame  him,  the  opportunity 
of  making  a  great  noise  about  his  persecutions. 
His  decree,  therefore,  was  most  unfortunate,  and 
much  more  injurious  to  himself  than  to  his  enemies  ; 
for  the  appearance  of  being  persecuted  is,  in  this 
world,  a  tower  of  strength  to  those  who  are  desirous 
of  wielding  a  moral  influence  over  humanity. 


Julian. 

Enlarged  Photo  of  a  Sardonyx  Intaglio  in  the 
Cabinet  des  Medailles,  Paris. 
(By  permission  of  M.  E.  Bahelon.) 


The  same. 
(Actual  size.) 


To  face  page  421. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


The  unfortunate  Julian,  during  his  brief  career,  was 
doomed  to  be  the  victim  of  a  sad  disillusion,  for 
which  he  had  only  himself  to  blame.  He  must 
very  soon  have  understood  that  his  most  care- 
fully laid  plans  had  failed  to  accomplish  the  aim  so 
dear  to  his  heart.  The  polytheistic  propaganda, 
although  promulgated  and  directed  by  the  Emperor 
himself,  had  met  but  with  little  success.  Even 
those  devoid  of  enthusiasm  for  Christianity  ex- 
hibited an  absolute  indifference  to  the  restoration  of 
the  ancient  cults.  Julian's  most  strenuous  efforts 
were  void  of  results.  On  all  sides  he  was 
confronted  with  the  proof  of  this  state  of  affairs, 
and  his  acute  understanding  enabled  him  to 
appreciate  their  bitter  significance.  To  a  friend 
in  Cappadocia,  he  writes  :  "  Point  me  out  in  all 
Cappadocia  a  single  man  who  is  truly  a  Hellenist, 
because,  so  far,  I  have  only  met  those  who  do  not 
care  to  offer  sacrifices,  and  those  who  are  in- 
clined to  do  so,  do  not  know  how."^  And  closing 
his  letter  to  the  High  Priest  of  Galatia,  containing 
the   instructions   relative  to  the  oro^anisation  of 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  484. 

421 


422 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


priesthood,  with  which  we  are  already  acquainted, 
he  says  :  I  am  ready  to  come  to  the  assistance  of 
the  inhabitants  of  Pesinus,  if  they  endeavour  to 
propitiate  the  Mother  of  the  Gods ;  if  they  neglect 
her,  not  only  will  I  reprove  them,  but,  although  it 
is  unpleasant  for  me  to  say  so,  they  will  experience 
the  consequences  of  my  anger. 

To  me  it  is  not  permitted  either  to  receive  or  load  with  gifts 
A  mortal  under  the  ban  of  the  divine  ire. 

Convince  them,  therefore,  that  if  they  desire  me 
to  interest  myself  in  their  welfare,  they  must 
unanimously  devote  themselves  to  the  Mother  of 
the  Gods." ' 

It  is  a  strange  and  a  symptomatic  fact  that  in 
the  very  city  that  harboured  the  sanctuary  of  the 
goddess,  the  most  important  figure  of  reformed 
polytheism,  Julian  was  obliged  to  resort  to  threats 
to  spur  on  the  exhausted  zeal  of  the  inhabitants, 
and  incite  them  to  honour  the  gods ! 

But  particularly  interesting,  even  in  this  respect, 
is  the  graceful  letter  written  by  Julian  to  Libanius, 
in  which  he  describes  the  march  from  Antioch 
to  Hierapolis.^  Arriving  at  Litharbos,  the  first 
post  of  his  journey,  Julian  is  overtaken  by  the 
Senate  of  Antioch,  to  whom  he  gives  audience  in 
his  lodgings.  It  is  most  probable  that  the 
Antiochians  desired  to  appease  the  indignant 
emperor,  who,  on  leaving  their  city,  had  declared 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  555.  2  jbid.^  op.  cit.^  515. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


423 


that  he  never  intended  to  return  to  it.  He  does 
not  give  the  result  of  the  conference,  preferring  to 
acquaint  Libanius  with  it  viva  voce^  when  they 
meet  again,  if  he  has  not  already  heard  it.  From 
Litharbos  he  goes  to  Beroe,  where  he  remains 
for  one  day  to  visit  the  Acropolis,  to  sacrifice 
a  white  bull  to  Jupiter,  and  to  confer  with  its 
Senate  concerning  the  worship  of  the  gods.  "  But 
alack!"  exclaims  Julian,  with  a  smile  both  ironic 
and  sad,  ''all  warmly  praised  my  discourse,  but 
very  few  were  convinced,  and  those  few  were 
already  convinced  before  hearing !  " 

From  Beroe,  Julian  travels  to  Batne,  a  spot  of 
surpassing  beauty,  only  to  be  compared  with 
Daphne,  the  suburb  of  Antioch,  before  the  Temple 
of  Apollo  had  been  destroyed  by  fire.  The  loveli- 
ness of  the  plain,  the  exquisite  groves  of  green 
Cyprus,  the  modest  Imperial  palace,  the  gardens  that 
surround  it  less  splendid  than  those  of  Alcinous, 
but  similar  to  those  of  Laertes,  the  beds  full  of 
vegetables  and  the  trees  laden  with  fruit — all,  in 
truth,  charm  and  delight  him.  And,  added  to  this, 
the  perfume  of  incense  that  filled  the  air,  and  the 
solemn  pomp  which  attended  the  offering  of 
sacrifice.  But  even  here  the  insatiable  Emperor 
was  not  wholly  content ;  the  excess  of  his  religious 
zeal  left  him  no  peace,  and  he  seemed  to  find  a 
pleasure  in  tormenting  himself.  The  great  ex- 
citement and  display  of  luxury  appear  to  him  un- 
necessary.   According  to  his  ideas,  the  worship  of 


424 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


the  gods  should  be  conducted  with  tranquil  dignity, 
and  he  decides  that  he  will,  later  on,  arrange 
everything  as  it  should  be.  Perhaps  the  suspicious 
Julian  saw  in  these  excessive  manifestations  a 
desire  to  throw  dust  in  his  eyes,  and  not  a  proof  of 
sincere  devotion.  He  finally  arrives  at  Hierapolis, 
where  he  is  received  by  Sopater,  the  pupil  and  son- 
in-law  of  lamblichus,  the  philosopher,  Julian's  god 
on  earth.  His  joy  is  immense,  the  more  so,  be- 
cause Sopater  is  personally  dear  to  him,  and  because 
when  he  had  entertained  Constantius  and  Gallus 
and  they  pressed  him  to  forsake  the  worship  of  the 
gods,  he  valiantly  resisted,  and  kept  himself  free 
from  the  prevailing  disease  (ouk  iXri(f)6r}  rfj  voatp). 

He  does  not  write  to  Libanius  concerning 
political  and  military  affairs,  as  it  would  be  impos- 
sible to  discuss  so  many  things  in  one  letter.  But 
in  order  to  give  him  an  idea  of  what  he  is  doing,  he 
notes  that  he  has  sent  a  mission  to  the  Saracens 
to  secure  them  as  allies,  has  organised  a  service 
of  information,  presided  over  military  tribunals,  has 
collected  a  quantity  of  horses  and  mules  for 
transport,  and  brought  together  a  fleet  of  river 
boats  laden  with  flour  and  biscuits.  To  this  we 
must  add  his  great  epistolary  correspondence  that 
follows  him  wherever  he  goes,  and  his  reading, 
which  is  never  interrupted.  Certainly  no  man  was 
ever  so  thoroughly  occupied. 

However,  the  most  evident  proof  of  Julian's  lack 
of  success  is  furnished  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus. 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


425 


He  was  not  a  Christian.  It  would  therefore  be 
supposed  that,  in  writing  the  history  of  the  apostate 
Emperor,  he  would  express  himself  with  the 
greatest  enthusiasm  concerning  the  attempt  he  had 
initiated,  and  welcome  in  his  person  the  long 
expected  restorer.  But  such  was  not  the  case. 
Ammianus  on  this  subject  is  icily  indifferent.  He 
makes  some  sarcastic  allusions  to  the  Christians, 
who  hate  each  other  much  more  fiercely  than 
ferocious  beasts  ;  but  Julian's  enterprise  does  not 
interest  him  in  the  slightest,  as  he  only  sees  in  it  a 
fad,  a  philosopher's  day-dream,  unworthy  of  serious 
consideration.  As  we  have  previously  seen,  he 
considers  the  decree  which  deprived  the  Christian 
teachers  of  the  use  of  pagan  books  as  excessive 
("  inclem.ens  ")  and  does  not  hesitate  to  express  his 
disapproval  of  the  ritualistic  mania  of  the  over- 
zealous  Emperor.  Now,  if  this  was  the  case  with 
Ammianus,  a  man  who,  judging  from  his  culture, 
ought  to  have  been  particularly  devoted  to  the 
ancient  cult,  it  is  easy  to  imagine  the  profound 
indifference,  we  might  say  hostility,  that  Julian 
encountered  in  the  social  body  to  whom  the  ideals 
of  Hellenism  had  become  absolutely  extraneous. 
The  truth  is  that  Julian  was  only  understood  by 
the  rhetoricians  and  philosophers  who  belonged  to 
the  narrow  Neo- Platonic  coterie.  If  we  want  to 
see  his  work  appreciated,  we  must  refer  to  the 
Necrologia "  of  Libanius,  which,  while  noting 
Julian's  many  glories  and  merits,  also  attributes  to 


426  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


him  the  re-establishment  of  the  religious  sentiment 
which  had  been  so  long  banished  from  the  world.^ 

But  Julian,  nevertheless,  had  a  few  consolations, 
in  the  midst  of  his  many  disillusions.  Great  must 
have  been  his  joy  when  some  conspicuous  personage 
of  the  Christian  Church  returned  to  the  bosom  of 
polytheism.  This,  however,  happened  only  on 
extremely  rare  occasions.  The  complete  vanity 
of  his  attempt  and  the  exhaustion  of  paganism 
were  evident  to  all.  The  only  case  with  which 
we  are  acquainted  is  that  of  Bishop  Pegasius,  and  it 
is  narrated  by  Julian  himself,  in  a  letter  that  is  one 
of  the  most  precious  in  his  collection  of  Epistles, 
especially  because  it  is  such  a  living  picture  of  the 
atmosphere  in  which  he  lived.  Julian,  it  appears, 
had  promoted  the  apostate  bishop  to  some  high 
sacerdotal  dignity,  and,  by  so  doing,  had  wounded 
the  susceptibility  of  some  strict  Hellenist.  The 
Emperor  thus  answers:^ — 

"  We  should  certainly  not  have  received  Pegasius 
so  readily  if  we  had  not  been  assured  that  even 
before,  when  he  was  Bishop  of  the  Galileans,  he 
was  not  averse  to  acknowledge  and  love  the 
gods.  And  I  do  not  assert  this  because  I  have 
heard  it  from  those  who  are  in  the  habit  of  speaking 
when  moved  either  by  love  or  hate,  as  even,  in  my 
hearing,  there  has  been  a  great  deal  of  idle  talk 
concerning  him,  so  that,  by  the  gods,  I  believe  I 
ought  to  have  hated  him  more  than  any  other 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  249.  ^  Julian.,  op.  ciL,  603. 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


427 


individual  among  those  wicked  people.  But,  when 
I  was  called  by  Constantius  to  the  army,  I  began 
my  journey  from  the  Troad  in  the  early  morning, 
and  arrived  at  Ilium  at  the  hour  of  the  market.  He 
came  to  meet  me,  and  on  my  saying  that  I  wished 
to  visit  the  city — which  served  me  as  a  pretext  to 
enter  the  temples — he  offered  to  be  my  guide,  and 
accompanied  me  everywhere.  And  he  acted  and 
spoke  in  such  a  manner  as  to  awaken  doubts  in 
me  as  to  whether  he  was  really  ignorant  of  his 
duties  towards  the  gods. 

There  is  in  Ilium  a  sanctuary  dedicated  to 
Hector,  and  there,  in  a  little  temple,  you  see  his 
statue  in  bronze.  Opposite  to  his  statue  is  that  of 
the  great  Achilles  sub  ccelo.  If  you  ever  visited 
the  spot,  you  will  remember  what  I  am  describ- 
ing. ...  I  discovered  still  alight,  I  might  almost 
say  burning  brightly,  the  fire  on  the  altar,  and  the 
statue  of  Hector  shining  with  ointment.  Turning 
to  Pegasius,  I  asked,  *  What  is  the  meaning  of 
this  ?  Do  the  inhabitants  of  Ilium  still  persevere 
in  the  worship  of  the  gods  ?  '  I  wished,  without 
appearing  to  put  the  question,  to  find  out  his 
manner  of  thinking.  And  he  replied,  '  Why  is  it 
strange  that  they  should  honour  a  brave  man,  their 
fellow-citizen,  as  we  honour  our  martyrs  ? '  The 
comparison  was  by  no  means  opportune,  but  the  in- 
tention, considering  the  moment,  was  praiseworthy. 
After  this  I  said,  '  Let  us  go  to  the  temple  of  the 
Ilian  Minerva.'    And  he,  full  of  good-will,  conducted 


428 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


me  thither,  opening  the  temple  with  his  own  hands, 
and  he  pointed  out  to  me  with  great  concern,  as 
if  it  were  of  importance  to  him,  that  all  the  sacred 
images  were  safe,  and  did  not  make  any  of  the 
acts  in  which  the  impious  ones  indulge,  neither  did 
he  make  the  sign  of  the  cross  on  his  forehead,  nor 
did  he  mumble  unto  himself,  as  they  are  wont  to 
do.  For  the  acme  of  all  theology  among  these 
people  lies  in  these  two  things,  murmuring  im- 
precation against  the  demons,  and  making  the  sign 
of  the  cross  upon  their  foreheads. 

"  Of  these  two  facts  I  have  already  spoken 
with  thee.  But  I  must  not  keep  silence  concerning 
a  third  that  just  now  comes  to  my  mind.  He 
followed  me  to  the  sanctuary  of  Achilles,  and 
showed  me  that  the  sepulchre  was  intact.  And 
I  found  out  that  it  was  he  who  had  discovered  it. 
And  he  stood  before  it  in  an  attitude  of  the  deepest 
respect.  All  this  I  saw  myself.  And  I  heard  from 
others  who  were  his  enemies  that  he  secretly 
prayed  and  knelt  to  the  sun-god.  Did  he  not 
thus  receive  me  when  as  yet  I  only  professed  my 
faith  in  private  ?  Of  our  individual  disposition 
towards  the  gods,  who  are  better  judges  than  the 
gods  themselves  ?  And  should  we  have  named 
Pegasius  priest  if  we  knew  that,  in  any  manner, 
he  had  sinned  against  the  gods  ?  If  in  that  time, 
either  through  the  desire  of  power,  or,  as  he 
himself  often  told  me,  to  save  the  temples  of  the 
gods,  he  clothed   himself  with    those  rags,  and 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


429 


pretended,  in  words  only,  to  practise  their  impiety 
(he  in  fact  did  no  other  damage  to  the  temples 
than  to  knock  down  a  few  stones  from  their  roofs, 
in  order  to  save  the  rest),  shall  we  blame  him  for 
this  ?  Should  we  not  feel  ashamed  to  treat  him 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  give  pleasure  to  the 
Galileans,  who  only  desire  to  see  him  suffer?  If 
thou  hast  any  regard  for  me,  thou  wilt  honour  not 
this  one  alone,  but  all  others  who  become  converted  ; 
thus  they  will  more  easily  hearken  to  us  who  invite 
them  to  follow  that  which  is  best.  If  we  repulse 
those  who  spontaneously  come  to  us,  no  one  will 
heed  our  call.  .  .  ." 

This  Pegasius  must  have  been  a  cunning  rogue. 
Probably  he  had  some  information  about  Julian's 
secret  Hellenistic  tendencies.  Foreseeing  the 
eventuality  of  Julian,  the  sole  male  heir  of  the 
Constantinian  family,  being  called  to  the  throne 
at  no  distant  day,  notwithstanding  the  jealousy 
of  Constantius,  the  astute  Bishop  was  preparing 
the  ground  for  a  future  volte-face,  and  that  without 
compromising  himself  with  the  then  ruling  powers. 
The  art  with  which  he  knew  how  to  insinuate 
himself  into  the  good  graces  of  Julian,  apparently 
so  candid  and  yet  so  non-committal,  gives  evidence 
of  great  subtlety  and  shrewdness,  and  Julian,  in- 
genuous, like  all  over-zealous  apostles,  let  himself 
be  hoodwinked,  and  mistook  a  sharp  intriguer  and 
a  bit  of  clever  acting  for  a  serious  man  and  the 
proof  of  a  profound  conviction.    The  converts  that 


430  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


he  made  from  among  the  deserters  from  Christianity 
could  only  be  men  as  despicable  as  Pegasius.  His 
friends  and  followers  protested  against  the  honours 
accorded  to  these  ;  but  the  unhappy  Emperor,  for 
lack  of  better  results,  was  obliged  to  content  himself 
with  even  the  appearance  of  success,  and  to  find  in 
imposture  a  reason  for  recompense. 

But  the  full  confession  of  Julian's  disillusion  we 
find  in  the  bitter  sarcasms  of  the  Misopogon.  The 
Misopogon  [Mcaoircoycov)  is  Julian's  masterpiece.  In 
his  other  writings,  excepting  of  course  some  of 
the  Letters,  which  are  most  beautiful,  there  is  too 
much  of  the  pedantic  litterateur,  of  the  rhetorician, 
who  writes  species  of  essays  on  the  restricted 
lines  of  predetermined  models.  The  Banquet  of 
the  CcEsars  is,  as  we  shall  see  later,  a  satire  not 
without  spirit  and  sentiment,  but  it  seems  forced, 
and  lacks  spontaneity  and  genuine  inspiration. 
In  the  Misopogon,  Julian  really  speaks  ex 
abundantia  cordis,  and  his  satire,  besides  being  a 
vivid  picture  of  the  corruption  of  a  great  city 
during  the  Lower  Empire,  is  a  perfect  revelation 
of  the  character  of  the  man  and  the  sovereign, 
and  of  the  embarrassing  position  in  which  he  had 
become  entangled.  And  the  writer  gives  proof 
of  no  little  art,  because,  from  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  this  long  pamphlet  against  the  inhabitants 
of  Antioch,  he  never  fails  to  maintain  the  irony 
with  which  he  accuses  himself  and  assumes  the 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION  431 


part  of  his  slanderers.  And  how  many  witty 
sayings !  What  cutting  repartees,  how  many 
amusing  episodes,  and,  underlying  it  all,  what 
bitterness  and  disillusion ! 

The  following  circumstance  gave  birth  to  this 
spirited  philippic  of  the  offended  Emperor.  Julian, 
after  having  remained  nearly  a  year  at  Con- 
stantinople, left  there,  in  the  summer  of  362,  for 
Antioch,  which  he  decided  to  make  his  head- 
quarters, for  the  preparation  of  the  expedition 
against  the  king  of  Persia.  He  visited  Nicomedia, 
where  he  had  passed  a  part  of  his  youth,  and  was 
greatly  distressed  at  seeing  how  much  it  had 
suffered  from  the  earthquake  which  had  just 
taken  place ;  then  passing  through  Nicaea,  he 
stopped  at  Pesinus  to  worship  at  the  shrine  of 
the  goddess  Cybele,  the  Mother  of  the  Gods, 
and  during  the  night  he  writes  his  mystical  dis- 
sertation. By  way  of  Ancyra  and  Tarsus,  Julian 
arrives  at  Antioch,  and  is  there  received  by  an 
immense  multitude,  who  welcome  him  as  the  new 
Star  in  the  East.^  But  the  popular  enthusiasm 
was  not  of  long  duration,  and  it  soon  became 
evident  that,  between  the  Emperor  and  the 
Antiochians,  there  was  a  radical  discord.  Julian, 
even  in  the  midst  of  his  great  preparations  for 
his  Persian  expedition,  did  not  forget  the  principal 
object  of  his  reign,  that  is  to  say,  the  re-establish- 
ment of  a  moralised  paganism.     Now  Antioch, 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit.,  i.  287,  3  sq. 


432 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


a  city  in  which  Christianity  had  taken  root  ever 
since  apostoHc  times,  was  almost  entirely  Christian. 
This,  however,  did  not  prevent  its  being  one  of  the 
most  corrupt,  luxurious,  and  depraved  cities  of  the 
East.  Julian,  with  the  imprudent  over-zealousness 
of  the  religious  reformer  and  preacher,  unflinchingly 
assailed  the  habits,  prejudices,  and  abuses  which 
pervaded  this  great  city.  The  inhabitants,  on 
their  side,  were  indignant  at  this  disturber,  who 
pretended  to  revive  rites  and  ceremonies  long 
since  fallen  into  disuse,  openly  disapproved  of  their 
licentious  habits,  and  expressed  the  greatest  disdain 
for  theatrical  pageants,  horse- races,  and  all  the  other 
amusements  so  dear  to  their  effeminate  souls.  In 
repressing  these  abuses,  he  w^ounded  the  interests 
of  those  highly-placed  and  the  jobbers,  of  whom 
there  seemed  to  be  a  great  number  in  the  city. 
In  place  of  the  religious  enthusiasm  which 
burned  so  ardently  in  his  heart,  he  found  among 
the  Antiochians  a  hostile  indifference,  and  was 
obliged  to  recognise  that  his  moralising  tendencies 
were  in  absolute  contradiction  to  the  confirmed 
habits  and  the  irreparable  decadence  of  the  public 
spirit.  This,  of  course,  gave  rise  to  the  most 
strident  discord,  and  an  increasing  feeling  of  dis- 
trust and  dislike  between  the  Emperor  and  the 
Antiochians.  But  the  Antiochians  lacked  either 
the  energy  or  the  inclination  for  open  rebellion. 
They  possessed  all  the  Greek  acuteness  and 
subtlety,    and   they   used    them    to   deride  the 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION  433 


Emperor.  Julian's  severe  aspect,  his  harsh  and 
unpolished  manners,  his  untidy  clothes,  and  above 
all  his  beard — a  most  unusual  sight  among  the 
clean-shaven  and  effeminate -looking  faces  of  the 
Antiochians — were  unfailing  sources  of  jest  and 
jeer.  The  city  was  filled  with  libels  written  in 
verse  ridiculing  the  Emperor,  and  these  libels 
formed  the  greatest  subject  of  amusement  for 
this  population,  pre  -  eminently  worthless  and 
frondeuse.  If  Julian  had  been  a  tyrant,  or  even 
only  a  harsh  and  violent  ruler,  he  would  very 
easily  have  avenged  himself  on  those  who  scoffed 
at  him,  and  thus  have  put  an  end  to  their  dis- 
respectful jests.  For  not  only  a  tyrant  of  ancient 
times,  but  probably  a  sovereign  of  to-day,  might 
have  acted  in  this  manner.  But  Julian,  by  nature 
kindly  and  long-suffering,  decided  to  avenge  him- 
self in  a  way  that,  for  an  emperor,  was  as  peculiar 
as  it  was  unusual.  He  repaid  the  Antiochians  in 
their  own  coin,  and  composed  a  satire  against  them 
in  reply  to  those  they  had  written  against  him. 
And  who  would  have  said  then  that  his  revenge 
would  be  really  more  efficacious  than  any  other  ? 
If  he  had  followed  a  contrary  course,  and  punished 
the  offenders  with  prison  or  death,  his  insulters 
would  either  have  been  forgotten  or  glorified  as 
martyrs ;  on  the  contrary,  by  the  power  of  his 
wit  he  has  kept  their  memory  alive,  and 
has  handed  them  down  to  the  lasting  ridicule  of 
posterity.     Ammianus    Marcellinus,  conscientious 

VOL.  II. — 8 


434 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


narrator,  faithful  soldier,  and  devoted  to  Julian, 
whom  he  admires  for  his  virtue  and  intelligence, 
did  not  approve  of  the  publication  of  the  Misopogon, 
as  it  seemed  to  him  an  exaggerated  and  imprudent 
satire.  But  the  good  Ammianus  was  an  Antiochian 
himself,  and  therefore  inclined  to  excuse  his  fellow- 
citizens,  and,  moreover,  as  he  was  a  pedantic  writer, 
he  did  not  possess  a  taste  for  literary  beauty. 
He,  most  probably,  admired  those  works  of  his 
Emperor  in  which  the  latter  followed  the  scholastic 
methods  of  the  rhetoric  of  his  time,  but  could 
not  appreciate  the  elegance  of  this  discourse,  in 
which  Julian,  liberated  from  the  bonds  of  his 
school,  gives  us  a  true  insight  into  his  wit  and 
his  poetic  talent. 

Believing  it  may  be  agreeable  to  our  few  but 
appreciative  readers,  we  will  offer  them  the  transla- 
tion of  a  great  part  of  the  Misopogon.  Like  all 
the  rest  of  Julian's  writings,  this  pamphlet  lacks 
the  arduus  limce  labor,  and  is  irregular  in  its 
composition.  But  it  has  the  great  merit  of  being 
absolutely  living,  the  natural  outpouring  of  his  in- 
most heart.  The  personality  of  the  author,  with 
its  original  and  passionate  emotion,  shines  forth  in 
the  pages  of  this  bitter  and  brilliant  satire,  which 
is  also  a  speaking  picture  of  public  life  during 
the  fourth  century.  The  curse  of  the  Church 
has  put  under  ban  and  condemned  to  unmerited 
oblivion  this  little  volume,  for  many  reasons  well 
worthy  of  consideration. 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


435 


In  order  fully  to  understand  the  satire,  we  must 
never  forget  that,  from  beginning  to  end,  it  is  a 
bitter  and  ironic  jest,  and  that  Julian  assumes 
against  himself  the  part  of  his  slanderers,  reproducing 
their  words  as  if  they  were  his  own,  and  certainly 
exaggerating  their  expressions.^ 

The  poet  Anacreon  " — thus  he  begins — "  com- 
posed many  graceful  odes  ;  the  fates  allowed  him 
to  enjoy  himself.  But  neither  to  Alcaeus  nor  to 
Archilocus  did  the  gods  permit  that  their  Muse 
should  sing  of  joy  and  pleasure.  For  many 
reasons,  constrained  to  be  sad,  they  made  use 
of  poetry  to  render  more  bearable  to  themselves 
the  invectives  with  which  their  familiar  spirit 
inspired  them  against  the  wicked.  The  law  for- 
bids me  to  accuse  by  name  those  whom  I  have 
not  offended,  but  who  are,  notwithstanding,  evilly 
disposed  towards  me,  and  the  fashion  that  now 
rules  the  education  of  free  men  debars  me  from 
writing  songs,  as  it  is  now  considered  more  shameful 
to  write  poetry  than  it  once  was  to  enrich  oneself 
dishonestly.  But  for  all  this,  as  long  as  it  is 
possible,  I  intend  to  avail  myself  of  the  help  of 
the  Muses.  I  remember  having  heard  the 
barbarians  sing  along  the  banks  of  the  Rhine, 
and  their  voices  could  hardly  be  distinguished  from 
the  croaking  of  crows  ;  yet  they  seemed  to  take 
pleasure  in  their  songs,  for  it  appears  that  the  fact 
of  their  being  disagreeable  to  others  does  not  prevent 

1  Julian.,  op,  cit,^  433  sq. 


436 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


bad  musicians  from  taking  pleasure  in  their  own 
performance.  .  .  .  And  I,  too,  sing  for  the 
Muses  and  myself  My  song,  however,  to  tell  the 
truth,  will  be  in  prose,  and  will  contain  much 
contumely  not  against  others,  by  Jove! — how  could 
I  possibly  venture,  if  the  law  forbids  it  ? — but  rather 
against  the  poet  and  singer  himself.  And  no  law 
forbids  a  man  writing  praises  of  or  insults  to  himself 
But,  however  great  may  be  my  desire,  I  have  no 
reason  to  praise  myself,  and  on  the  contrary  I 
have  many  reasons  to  find  fault  with  myself, 
beginning  with  my  personal  appearance.^  Because 
on  this  my  face,  which  Nature  made  neither 
beautiful,  pleasing,  nor  graceful,  I,  in  contempt 
and  disgust,  have  grown  this  thick  beard,  as  if 
to  revenge  myself  on  Nature  because  she  has  not 
made  me  pretty.  And  I  permit  the  lice  to  run 
riot  through  my  beard,  like  wild  beasts  in  a  forest. 
And  I  am  not  able  to  eat  immoderately,  nor  to 
drink  in  great  gulps,  for  I  must  be  overcautious 
not  to  swallow  my  hair  with  my  food.  As  to  not 
being  able  to  receive  or  give  kisses,  that  does 
not  worry  me  very  much,  though  in  this  respect, 
as  in  others,  my  beard  is  most  inconvenient,  not 
permitting  me  to  press  'pure  lips  to  sweet  lips, 
which  makes  the  kiss  sweeter,'  according  to  one 
of  the  poets  who,  together  with  Pan  and  Calliope, 
sing  of  Daphne.    But  you  say  that  of  my  hair 

^  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  Julian,  for  purposes  of  sarcasm, 
repeats,  as  if  confirming  them,  the  jeers  of  his  slanderers. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


437 


one  might  easily  twine  ropes.    And  I  would  most 
willingly  offer  it  to  you,  only  the  question  would 
be  if  you  could  pluck  it  off,  for,  being  so  tough, 
it  might  injure  your  nerveless  and  delicate  hands. 
.  .  .  But  I  am  not  satisfied  with  the  roughness  of 
my  chin,  my  head  also  is  all  dishevelled,  and  very 
seldom  do  I  trim  my  hair  or  cut  my  nails,  and 
my  fingers  are  often  black  with  ink.    And  if  you 
wish  to  hear  something  that  I  have  never  before 
acknowledged,  my  chest  is  rugged  and  as  full  of 
hairs  as  that  of  a  lion  who  rules  over  the  wild 
beasts,  and,  because  of  my  roughness  and  negligence, 
I  have  never  taken  the  trouble  to  render  it  tender 
and  more  soft  than  any  other  part  of  the  body. 
But  let  us  speak  of  other  things.    Not  satisfied 
with  having  such  a   body,   I   have  undoubtedly 
the  most  disagreeable   habits.     My  churlishness 
is  so  great  that  I  keep  away  from  the  theatres, 
and   in   the    Imperial    palace   permit    only  one 
theatrical  representation,  at  the  New  Year,  and 
that  unwillingly,  as  one  who  pays  a  tribute,  and 
ungracefully  hands  over  what  he  has  to  a  hard 
taskmaster.  .  .  .  This  should  be  sufficient  proof 
of  bad  habits.    But  to  this  I  can  add  somethino- 
more.    I  hate  horse-racing  as  much  as  debtors  do 
the  market.    I  am  rarely  present,  only  on  the  feasts 
of  the  gods,  and  never  spend  the  whole  day  there, 
as  was  the  usual  habit  of  my  cousin,  uncle,  and 
brother.    After  having  witnessed  six  races  at  the 
utmost,  and  by  Jove !  certainly  not  with  the  air 


438  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  one  enjoying  the  amusement,  but  rather  as  one 
thoroughly  bored,  I  am  only  too  happy  to  get 
away.  But  who  can  tell  how  much  I  have  offended 
you  ?  The  sleepless  nights  on  my  rude  couch,  and 
the  food  which  is  not  sufficient  to  surfeit  me,  makes 
me  churlish  and  inimical  to  a  city  that  only  cares 
for  amusements.  But  if  such  be  my  habits,  it  is 
no  fault  of  yours.  A  grave  error,  into  which  I  have 
fallen  since  my  childhood,  induced  me  to  make  war 
on  my  stomach,  and  I  have  never  accustomed  my- 
self to  fill  it  with  too  much  food." 

And  Julian  here  relates  that  it  only  happened 
to  him  once  in  his  life  to  vomit  up  his  dinner — 
a  habit  which,  it  appears,  was  usual  among  the 
Antiochians,  as  it  had  once  been  among  the 
Romans.  And  this  incident  took  place  during 
his  sojourn  in  Paris — his  dear  Lutetia,  as  he  calls  it. 
It  was  not  brought  about  by  eating  too  much  food, 
but  from  causes  quite  different.  Having  warmed 
with  live  embers  the  room  in  which  he  was  sleep- 
ing, this  imprudence  produced  giddiness,  fainting 
and  nausea.  This  digression  is  charming,  with  its 
description  of  the  Gallic  winter,  the  frozen  Seine, 
and  the  barbaric  vigour  of  the  inhabitants. 

"Thus" — continues  Julian ^ — "in  the  midst  of 
the  Celts,  like  the  '  Rough  Man  '  of  Menander,  I 
accustomed  myself  to  rough  habits.  But  if  this 
was  to  the  taste  of  the  uncouth  Celts,  it  is  reason- 
able that  it  should  elicit  the  scorn  of  a  beautiful, 

^  Julian.,  op.  cif.,  440,  10  sq. 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


439 


happy,  and  populous  city,  where  there  are  many 
dancers  and  flutists,  mimes  more  numerous  than 
the  citizens,  and  not  the  sHghtest  respect  for  its 
sovereign.  Weak  men  blush  for  certain  habits  ; 
but  brave  men,  like  you,  go  to  bed  in  the  morning 
after  having  spent  the  night  in  orgies.  In  this 
manner  you  show  your  contempt  for  the  law,  not 
in  words,  but  by  deeds.  .  .  .  And  dost  thou 
imagine" — Julian  makes  the  Antiochians  reply 
to  him — "  that  it  was  possible  for  thy  roughness, 
misanthropy,  and  harshness  to  harmonise  with 
these  customs  ?  O  thou  most  stupid  and  hateful 
of  men,  is  that  which  the  ignorant  call  thy  sapient 
apology  for  a  soul  so  silly  and  inept,  that  thou 
couldst  imagine  it  was  possible  to  adorn  and 
embellish  it  with  wisdom  ?  Thou  art  mistaken, 
because,  first  of  all,  we  do  not  know  what  wisdom 
is  ;  we  hear  its  name,  but  ignore  what  it  does.  If 
this  consists  in  what  thou  doest,  in  the  knowing 
that  we  must  obey  the  gods  and  the  laws,  treat 
equals  as  equals,  tolerate  their  superiority,  be 
careful  to  see  that  the  poor  are  not  offended  by 
the  rich,  and  for  all  this,  submit,  as  it  has  often 
happened  to  thee,  to  disdain,  anger,  and  abuse, 
and  suffer  even  this  serenely  and  without  irritation, 
not  giving  way  to  temper,  but  controlling  it,  and, 
as  is  fitting,  to  be  prudent  ;  and  some  one  might 
add  to  this,  that  it  is  also  wisdom  to  abstain  in 
public  from  any  pleasure  that  would  be  compromis- 
ing and  not  commendable,  in  the  persuasion  that  he 


440 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


who  cannot  restrain  himself,  and  delights  in  theatre- 
going,  cannot  act  wisely  in  the  privacy  of  his  home  ; 
if  this  be  wisdom,  thou  art  on  the  road  to  perdition, 
and  wouldst  take  us  with  thee — we  who,  above  all, 
do  not  tolerate  the  name  of  servitude,  neither  to 
the  gods  nor  the  laws.  Liberty  in  all  things  is 
sweet.  And  what  irony !  Thou  sayest  that  thou 
art  not  the  master,  and  wilt  not  tolerate  that  name, 
and  art  so  indignant  as  to  force  those  who  had  the 
ancient  habit  of  using  it  to  discontinue  doing  so, 
because  it  is  odious  to  the  sovereign,  and  then  thou 
obligest  us  to  obey  the  commands  of  the  law.  But 
would  it  not  be  better  that  thou  shouldst  call  thy- 
self master,  and  that  we,  to  all  intents  and  purposes, 
should  be  free,  O  man  of  gentle  words  and  of  acts 
most  harsh  ?  And  this  is  not  enough ;  thou 
tormentest  the  rich  by  forcing  them  to  be  moderate 
in  the  tribunals,  and  restrainest  the  poor  from 
becoming  informers.  By  sending  away  the  actors, 
mimes  and  musicians,  thou  hast  ruined  our  city,  so 
that,  because  of  thee,  there  remains  nothing  good, 
excepting  thy  pedantry  that  we  have  tolerated  for 
seven  months,  and  of  which  we  hope  to  be  liberated 
by  uniting  in  prayer  with  the  processions  of  silly  old 
women  who  wander  around  among  the  sepulchres.^ 
We  have  sought,  in  the  meanwhile,  to  obtain  the 
same  effect  by  means  of  our  good  humour,  and 

^  Here  Julian  derides  the  cult  of  the  tombs  of  the  martyrs,  so 
fervently  practised  by  the  Christians,  and  by  him  considered  as 
a  ridiculous  superstition. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


441 


have  wounded  thee  with  our  jeers,  as  with  arrows. 
And  thou,  O  valorous  one,  how  shalt  thou  with- 
stand the  arrows  of  the  Persians,  if  thou  quailest 
before  our  raillery  ?  " 

Here  follows  a  most  curious  passage,  which 
gives  us  a  good  insight  into  Julian's  soul  and  inten- 
tions. The  Antiochians  were  not  badly  disposed 
towards  him,  nor  did  they  deny  him  their  applause. 
But  the  fact  was,  that  between  the  Antiochians  and 
himself  there  existed  a  profound  dissension.  They 
did  not  in  the  least  appreciate  the  spirit  of  religious 
reform  that  was  so  dear  to  him  and  constituted  the 
supreme  aim  of  his  government.  When  he  entered 
the  temples,  the  crowds  accompanied  and  saluted 
him  with  shouts  and  applause.  But  Julian  was 
much  more  struck  by  the  lack  of  respect  for  the 
holy  places  than  by  the  flattering  reception  they 
accorded  him,  and,  instead  of  thanking  the  citizens, 
he  chided  them.  The  sceptical  Antiochians,  true 
children  of  an  expiring  civilisation,  did  not  under- 
stand this  strange  emperor,  and  laughed  at  him. 
"  Thou  enterest  the  temples," — so  Julian  makes 
them  say  to  him,^ — "  O  thou  rough,  awkward,  and, 
in  all  respects,  odious  man.  The  crowd,  especially 
the  magistrates,  rush  into  the  temples  because  of 
thee,  and  receive  thee  there,  as  in  the  theatres, 
with  shouts  and  applause.  And,  instead  of  being 
pleased,  and  praising  them  for  what  they  have 
done,  thou,  wishing  to  be  more  wise  than  God 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  443,  15  sq. 


442  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


himself,  speakest  to  the  crowds  and  rebukest 
severely  those  who  shout,  saying  :  '  You  seldom 
come  into  the  temples  to  adore  the  gods,  but  you 
come  because  of  me,  and  fill  the  holy  places  with 
disorder.  It  behoves  wise  men  to  pray  sedately 
and  to  ask  in  silence  for  the  favour  of  the  gods. 
,  .  .  But  you,  instead  of  praising  the  gods,  praise 
men,  or,  to  express  it  more  truly,  instead  of  praising 
the  gods,  you  flatter  men.  And  I  think  it  would 
be  best  not  even  to  praise  the  gods  excessively, 
but  rather  to  serve  them  with  wisdom.  .  .  .  Thou 
must  accustom  thyself  to  be  hated  and  vituperated 
in  private  and  in  public,  since  thou  dost  condemn 
as  adulation  the  applause  with  which  thou  wert 
received  in  the  temples.  It  is  evident  that  thou 
art  unable  to  adapt  thyself  either  to  the  con- 
venances, the  habits  or  the  life  of  men.  And  so 
be  it.  But  who  would  be  able  to  stand  even  this, 
that  thou  sleepest  all  the  night  alone,  refusing 
everything  that  might  soften  thy  harsh  and  ugly 
soul  ?  Thou  boldest  thyself  aloof  from  all  tender- 
ness. And  the  worst  of  the  evil  is  that  thou 
enjoyest  this  kind  of  life,  and  takest  pleasure 
in  that  which  all  others  detest.  And,  moreover, 
thou  becomest  angry  with  those  who  tell  thee 
so  !  Thou  shouldst,  on  the  contrary,  thank  those 
who,  out  of  kindness  and  with  great  anxiety, 
exhort  thee,  in  their  verses,  to  pluck  out  the  hair 
from  thy  face,  and  to  offer  to  this  population, 
who  love  to  laugh,  some  spectacle  that  would  be 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


443 


agreeable  to  them,  beginning  by  thyself,  and  after 
that,  mimes,  musicians,  women  without  shame, 
boys  so  beautiful  that  they  can  be  mistaken  for 
women,  men  who  are  so  entirely  without  hair,  not 
only  on  their  cheeks,  but  also  on  their  whole  bodies, 
that  they  are  more  smooth-skinned  than  women 
themselves,  festivals,  processions,  but  by  Jove  !  not 
the  sacred  ones  in  which  it  is  necessary  to  comport 
oneself  gravely.  Of  this  sort  we  have  had  enough  ; 
in  fact,  we  are  thoroughly  surfeited  with  them.  The 
Emperor  has  sacrificed  once  in  the  temple  of  Jove, 
then  in  the  temple  of  Fortune  ;  he  went  three  times 
in  succession  to  the  temple  of  Ceres,  and  we  do 
not  know  how  many  times  to  that  of  Apollo — 
that  temple  betrayed  by  the  neglect  of  its  guardians 
and  destroyed  by  the  audacity  of  the  impious.  The 
Syrian  festival  arrives,  and  the  Emperor  immedi- 
ately presents  himself  at  the  temple  of  Jove  ; 
then  comes  the  general  festival,  and  the  Emperor 
again  goes  to  the  temple  of  Fortune  ;  he  abstains 
on  a  day  of  bad  omen,  and  then  immediately 
offers  up  his  prayers  again  in  the  temple  of  Jove. 
But  who  then  could  tolerate  an  emperor  who 
makes  such  frequent  visits  to  the  temples,  when 
he  should  be  free  to  disturb  the  gods  only  from 
time  to  time  and  to  celebrate,  instead,  those  festivals 
that  may  be  common  to  the  whole  population,  and 
in  which  even  those  who  do  not  know  the  gods, 
and  of  whom  the  city  is  full,  may  take  their  part  ? 
These,  forsooth,  would  give  us  pleasure  and  enjoy- 


444 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


ment,  and  be  accessible  to  all,  looking  at  the 
dancing  men,  the  many  boys  and  women.' — When 
I  think  of  this  " — so  Julian  pretends  to  answer  the 
Antiochians — I  congratulate  myself  on  your  happy 
frame  of  mind,  but  I  am  not  dissatisfied  with  my- 
self, since,  through  the  grace  of  some  god,  my 
habits  are  dear  to  me.  However,  as  you  well 
know,  I  do  not  become  angry  with  those  who 
abuse  my  manner  of  living.  On  the  contrary,  to 
the  witticisms  they  hurl  at  me,  I  add,  as  far  as  I 
am  able,  these  insults  which  I  unstintingly  shower 
upon  myself,  and  it  is  right  that  it  should  be  so, 
because  I  did  not,  in  the  beginning,  understand  the 
habits  of  this  town.  And  for  all  this  I  am  con- 
vinced that  no  man  of  my  age  has  read  as  many 
books  as  I  have !  " 

And  then  Julian  relates  the  well-known  tale 
of  Antiochus,  who  became  enamoured  of  his  step- 
mother, and  infers  from  this  that  the  inhabitants 
of  a  city  that  had  been  called  after  Antiochus  must 
be  no  less  devoted  to  pleasure  than  he  was.  It 
is  impossible " — he  then  continues  in  a  bantering 
tone,  but  not  without  bitterness  ^ — "  it  is  impossible 
to  reprove  posterity  for  endeavouring  to  rival  its 
founder  and  name-giver,  since  even  the  trees 
transmit  their  peculiarities,  so  that  the  branches 
resemble,  in  every  respect,  the  stem  from  which 
they  spring,  so,  too,  with  men,  the  habits  of  the 
ancestors  are  transmitted  to  their  descendants." 

1  Julian,,  oJ>.  cit.^  449,  3  sq. 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


445 


And  this  is  the  reason  why  the  Greeks  are 
superior  to  all  nations,  and  the  Athenians  first 
among  the  Greeks.  Thus  Julian  continues  :  "  But 
if  they  maintain  in  their  customs  the  ancient  ideas 
of  virtue,  it  is  natural  that  this  should  also  be  the 
case  with  the  Syrians,  the  Arabs,  the  Celts,  the 
Thracians,  the  Peonians,  the  Mcesians,  who  live 
between  the  Peonians  and  the  Thracians,  on  the 
banks  of  the  Danube.  Now,  from  the  last-named 
my  race  has  sprung,  and  I  inherit  from  them  my 
harsh,  severe,  intractable  character,  so  refractory  to 
love,  and  so  immovable  in  its  purposes.  Therefore 
I  begin  by  asking  pardon  for  myself,  and  this 
pardon  may  be  of  some  use  even  to  you,  who  are 
so  attached  to  the  habits  of  your  forefathers.  It  is 
not  with  the  intention  of  giving  offence  that  I  apply 
to  you  the  line  of  Homer — 

Liars,  but  excellent  dancers  at  the  balls  ! 

On  the  contrary,  I  mean  it  as  praise,  for  you 
preserve  the  love  of  your  national  traditions  !  And 
Homer  also,  with  the  same  purpose,  and  wishing 
to  praise  Autolicus,  said  that  he  surpassed  all 
others  as  a  thief  and  a  perjurer.  And  I  also  am 
infatuated  with  my  churlishness,  my  roughness. 
I  delight  in  not  being  easily  influenced,  in  not 
regulating  my  affairs  according  to  the  desires  of 
those  who  pray  me  or  deceive  me,  in  never  being 
affected  by  tumults  ;  yea,  all  this  disgrace,  I  love 
it !  .  .  .  But,  if  I  think  of  it,  I  find  in  myself  many 


446 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


other  faults.  Arriving  in  a  city  which,  though  free, 
does  not  tolerate  any  disorder  in  the  arrangement 
of  the  hair,  I  entered  it  with  my  hair  uncut  and  my 
beard  as  long  as  if  there  was  a  lack  of  barbers.  I 
wished  to  appear  as  an  old  grumbler  and  a  rough 
soldier,  when,  with  a  few  artistic  touches,  I  might 
have  passed  for  a  handsome  boy,  and  appear  quite 
youthful,  if  not  in  age,  at  least  on  account  of  the 
freshness  and  softness  of  my  face.  .  .  .  Thou  dost 
not  know  how  to  mix  with  men,  and  to  imitate  the 
polypus  that  assumes  the  colour  of  the  stones  to 
which  it  clings.  .  .  .  Hast  thou  forgotten  that  there 
is  a  difference  between  ourselves  and  the  Celts,  the 
Thracians  and  the  Illyrians  ?  Dost  thou  not  see 
how  many  shops  there  are  in  this  city  ?  Thou 
renderest  thyself  hateful  to  the  shopkeepers,  not 
permitting  them  to  sell  their  wares,  at  the  price  they 
desire,  to  the  inhabitants  as  well  as  to  strangers. 
The  merchants  accuse  the  proprietors  of  lands  of 
being  responsible  for  the  high  prices.  Thou  makest 
these  also  thy  enemies  by  compelling  them  to  act 
according  to  justice.  And  the  magistrates  of  the 
city,  goaded  by  the  double  reproof  (as  before 
they  enjoyed  double  gains,  being  at  the  same  time 
merchants  and  land-owners),  are  at  present  dis- 
pleased at  seeing  the  illicit  gains  from  both  sides 
wrested  from  them.  And,  in  the  meanwhile,  this 
Syrian  rabble  is  angry,  as  it  cannot  dance  and  get 
drunk !  And  thou  thinkest  that  thou  canst  feed 
them  sufficiently  by  providing  them  with  all  the 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


447 


grain  they  need  ?  A  thousand  thanks,  but  dost 
thou  not  know  that  one  cannot  find  an  oyster  in 
the  town?  .  .  .  Would  it  not  be  better  to  pass 
through  the  market  perfuming  it  with  incense,  and 
conducting  in  thy  suite  a  bevy  of  graceful  girls, 
who  would  attract  the  notice  of  the  citizens,  and 
choirs  of  women  whom  we  are  in  the  habit  of  seeing 
in  our  midst  ?  " 

To  these  questions,  which  the  pungent  writer 
attributes  to  his  adversaries,  he  replies  with  the 
account  of  his  education  with  which  we  are  already 
acquainted  (see  "  Life  of  Julian,"  pp.  28-32).  Even 
here  the  words  of  Julian  must  be  taken  as  they  are 
meant,  ironically  ;  and  his  apparent  reproof  to  the 
eunuch  Mardonius,  to  whose  care  he  was  confided 
during  his  boyhood,  is  but  an  expression  of  the  admi- 
ration and  respect  that  Julian  nourished  for  this  man, 
to  whom  he  owed  the  peculiar  bent  of  his  mind. 

Julian,  after  having  given  an  account  of  his 
education,  goes  on  to  say  that  by  the  study  of  the 
ancients,  and  especially  of  Plato,  he  learnt  that  the 
sovereign  has  the  duty  of  leading  his  subjects  by 
his  example  and  wisdom  to  the  practice  of  virtue. 

"But," — the  Antiochians  reply,^ — *'for  pruden- 
tial reasons,  thou  shouldst  desist  from  constraining 
men  to  act  justly,  and  permit  each  one  to  act 
according  to  his  will  or  his  ability.  The  peculiarity 
of  our  city  is  to  desire  unrestricted  liberty.  And 
thou,  not  comprehending  this,  wouldst  govern  it 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  458,  10  sq. 


448 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


with  wisdom?  But  dost  thou  not  observe  that 
amongst  us  there  is  absolute  liberty  even  for  the 
asses  and  camels  ?  Their  drivers  lead  them  under 
the  porticoes  as  if  they  were  tender  young  girls. 
The  uncovered  streets  and  the  squares  seem  not  to 
have  been  made  to  be  used  by  pack-saddled  asses  ; 
these  wish  to  pass  under  the  porticoes,  and  no  one 
forbids  it,  so  that  liberty  should  be  respected !  See 
how  free  our  city  is  !  And  thou  wouldst  have  our 
youths  quiet  and  think  about  subjects  pleasing  to 
thee,  or  at  least  say  that  which  you  like  to  hear  ? 
But  they  are  accustomed  to  the  greatest  freedom  in 
amusements,  and  they  indulge  in  them  without  any 
restraint." 

''The  inhabitants  of  Tarentum  " — thus  Julian 
continues — "received  condign  punishment  for  their 
jeers  made  at  the  expense  of  the  Romans,  when, 
being  drunk  at  the  feast  of  Bacchus,  they  insulted 
an  embassy  of  the  latter.  But  you  are  much  more 
lucky  than  the  Tarentinians,  for  you  amuse  yourself, 
not  for  a  few  days,  but  the  whole  year  round, 
offending,  instead  of  foreign  ambassadors,  your 
Emperor,  and  this  because  of  the  beard  on  his  chin, 
and  of  his  effigy  on  the  coins.  Well  done,  O  wise 
citizens,  and  both  ye  who  are  the  authors  of  the 
jeers  and  ye  who  hear  them  and  are  amused  by 
them  !  Because  it  is  evident  that  it  gives  as  much 
pleasure  to  those  who  crack  the  jokes  as  to  those 
who  listen  to  them.  I  congratulate  you  on  your 
concord  ;  you  are  indeed  an  united  city,  so  that 


JULIANS  DISILLUSION  449 


it  would  not  be  either  convenient  or  desirable  to 
repress  that  which  is  irrepressible  in  the  youths. 
It  would  really  be  a  decapitation  of  liberty  if  men 
were  not  to  be  allowed  to  say  and  do  what  they 
please.  Therefore,  it  being  well  understood  that  in 
all  things  there  must  be  liberty,  you  have  allowed  the 
women  to  act  according  to  their  pleasure,  so  that, 
in  their  relationship  with  you,  they  know  no 
restraint.  Then  you  left  to  them  the  education  of 
the  children,  fearing  that,  being  submitted  to  a 
more  severe  discipline,  they  would  become  similar 
to  slaves,  and  would  learn  while  young  to  respect 
the  old,  and,  by  adopting  this  bad  habit,  end  by 
respecting  even  the  magistrate,  finally  becoming 
perfect  not  as  men,  but  as  slaves,  wise,  temperate, 
and  educated,  and  thus  be  wholly  ruined.  Now,  what 
do  the  women  do  ?  They  lead  their  sons  to  their 
altars  through  the  seductions  of  pleasure,^  which  is 
the  most  powerful  and  acceptable  instrument,  not 
only  with  men,  but  with  wild  animals.  O  ye 
happy  ones,  who  in  this  manner  have  rebelled 
against  all  servitude,  first  towards  the  gods,  then 
towards  the  laws,  and  thirdly,  towards  those  who 
are  the  custodians  of  the  laws !  But  it  would  be 
foolish  on  our  part,  as  the  gods  do  not  concern 
themselves  with  this  city  of  the  free  and  do  not 
punish  it,  to  be  angry  or  displeased  about  it. 
For,  as  you  know,  the  insults  of  the  city  wound  us 

1  The  Christian  altars  are  here  indicated.  Note  the  awful 
insinuation. 

VOL.  II. — 9 


450 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


as  well  as  the  gods.  It  is  said  that  neither  the 
*  Ch '  nor  the  '  K  '  have  ever  done  injury  to  the 
city. — This  wise  riddle  of  yours  was  a  hard  nut  to 
crack,  but,  having  found  interpreters,  we  were 
informed  that  those  letters  were  the  initials  of 
names,  and  stood  one  for  Christ  (X/3to-T09,)  the  other 
for  Constantius  (KovaTavnos).  Now  let  me  speak 
to  you  openly  and  without  reserve.  Constantius  is 
guilty  of  one  wrong  against  you,  and  that  is  of 
not  having  murdered  me  after  creating  me  Caesar. 
May  the  gods  concede  to  you,  and  to  you  alone 
among  all  the  Romans,  the  enjoyment  of  many  men 
like  Constantius,  and,  above  all,  the  insatiability  of 
his  friends!  ...  I  have,  however,  offended  the 
greater  part  of  you,  I  should  say  all — the  Senate, 
the  merchants,  and  the  people.  The  people  are 
angry  against  me,  because  being  for  the  greater 
part,  if  not  entirely,  atheistic,^  they  see  I  am  wholly 
devoted  to  the  traditional  rites  of  divine  worship  ; 
those  in  power  because  they  are  prevented  from 
selling  their  wares  at  usurious  prices,  and  all  are 
discontented  to  a  man  ;  for,  although  I  have  not 
deprived  them  of  their  dancers  and  their  theatres, 
still  I  show  less  interest  in  them  than  I  do  in  the 
frogs  of  the  marshes.  Is  it  not,  therefore,  natural 
that  I  should  scold  myself  as  I  offer  you  so  many 
reasons  for  disliking  me  ?  " 

And  here  Julian  relates  with  much  wit  and 
subtle  irony  the  episode  of  Cato's  visit  to  Antioch, 

^  By  atheism,  Julian  intends  here  Christianity. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


451 


and  the  insults  offered  him  by  the  citizens,  and 
then  continues:^  "It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at 
that  to-day  I  receive  from  you  the  same  treatment, 
for,  as  compared  with  him,  I  am  much  more  rough, 
hard,  and  uncivilised  than  the  Celts  are  as  compared 
with  the  Romans.  Because  he,  having  been  born  in 
Rome,  lived  there  all  his  life.  But  I,  as  soon  as  I 
reached  the  years  of  manhood,  was  consigned  to  the 
Celts,  the  Germans,  and  the  Hercynian  Forest,  and 
there  I  passed  a  long  time,  living  as  a  hunter  in 
the  midst  of  wild  beasts,  finding  that  the  people 
around  me  knew  not  how  to  fawn  and  flatter,  but 
wished  to  live  simply  and  freely  on  an  equal  footing 
with  all.  So  my  early  education  and  the  knowledge 
I  attained  in  early  youth  of  the  ideas  of  Plato  and 
Aristotle  rendered  me  unfit  to  mix  with  people,  and 
to  look  for  happiness  in  diversion.  In  the  first 
moments  of  my  manly  independence  I  found 
myself  in  the  midst  of  the  most  valorous  and 
warlike  among  the  nations  of  the  earth,  who  ignore 
Venus  Copulatrix  and  Bacchus  Potator,  except  for 
the  necessities  of  propagating  the  species  and 
slaking  their  thirst  with  wine.  .  .  .  The  Celts  became 
so  devoted  to  me,  because  of  the  similarity  of  our 
habits,  that  they  were  not  only  willing  to  take  up 
arms  exclusively  for  me,  but  gave  me  their  property 
and  forced  me  to  accept  it,  however  little  it  was  my 
wont  to  ask,  and  in  all  things  were  ready  to  obey 
me.    And,  what  is  more  important,  the  fame  of  my 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  463,  15  sq. 


452 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


deeds  extended  from  there  even  to  you,  and  all 
acclaimed  me  as  valorous,  prudent,  and  just,  not 
only  strong  in  war,  but  capable  of  governing  in 
times  of  peace,  affable,  and  merciful.  But  you 
reply  to  this  : — In  the  first  place,  thou  hast  turned 
everything  in  the  world  topsy-turvy — I,  on  the 
contrary,  have  the  conviction  of  never  having  done 
so,  intentionally  or  unintentionally.  Again,  you 
say  that  with  my  beard  one  can  make  ropes,  and 
that  I  wage  war  against  the  '  Ch,'  and  that  you 
regret  the  '  K.'  May  the  protecting  gods  of  this 
city  concede  you  a  pair  of  the  last-named !  " 

The  indifference  of  the  Antiochians  was  un- 
conquerable, and  a  proof  of  it  was  the  burning  of 
the  temple  of  Apollo — an  act  said  to  have  been 
perpetrated  by  the  Christians.  The  better  to 
characterise  this  indifference,  the  author  of  the 
Misopogon  tells  us  the  following  little  story,  in 
which  he  is  not  aware  that  he  is  exposing  himself 
to  ridicule  by  the  excess  of  his  zeal :  ^ — 

In  the  tenth  month  falls  the  feast  of  your 
national  god,  and  it  is  customary  for  all  to  assemble 
at  Daphne.  I  also  went,  starting  from  the  temple 
of  Jupiter  Casius,  with  the  expectation  of  enjoying 
the  spectacle  of  your  wealth  and  magnificence. 
And  I  pictured  to  myself,  as  in  a  dream,  the  pomp 
and  the  sacrifices,  the  libations,  the  sacred  dances 
and  incense,  and  young  men  around  the  temple 
magnificently  attired  in  white  vestments,  prepared 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  467,  i  sq. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


453 


in  their  souls  to  adore  the  god.    But  when  I  entered 
the  temple,  I  did  not  see  either  incense  or  offerings 
of  fruit  or  victims.    I  was  profoundly  astonished  at 
this,  and  supposed  that  you  were  outside  waiting  for 
me  to  appear  and  give  the  signal,  as  I  am  the 
great   Hierophant.    But  when  I  questioned  the 
priest  about  the  sacrifice  the  city  was  supposed  to 
offer  on  the  occasion  of  the  annual  festival,  he 
replied  :  '  Well,  I  bring  from  my  house  a  goose  for 
the  god,  but  the  city  has  not  prepared  anything.' 
Then,  overcome  by  indignation,  I  addressed  to  the 
Council  this  severe  reprimand,  which  it  is,  I  think, 
advisable  that  I  should  record  :  '  It  is  shameful,'  I 
said,  '  that  such  a  great  city  should  be  so  niggardly 
in  the  worship  of  the  gods  ;  this  would  not  have 
happened  in  the  poorest  village  of  the  Pontus. 
The  city  owns  large  tracts  of  land,  and  notwith- 
standing this,  at  the  annual  feast  of  its  national  god, 
the  first  time  since  the  clouds  of  atheism  have  been 
dispersed,  it  does  not  even  offer  a  bird,  when  it 
should  offer  an  ox  for  each  of  its  wards,  or,  if  this 
were  too  much,  all  should  combine  to  offer  in 
common  one  bull.    In  spite  of  this,  every  one  of 
you  in  your  own  homes  is  lavish  in  his  banquets 
and  entertainments  ;  I  know  of  many  who  dissipate 
all  their  property  in  orgies  ;  but  when  it  is  a  matter 
of  your  salvation,  and  that  of  your  city,  no  one  will 
sacrifice  on  his  own  account,  and  not  even  the 
municipality  for  the  benefit  of  all.    The  priest  is 
left  severely  alone  to  offer  his  sacrifice,  when  in  my 


454  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


opinion,  instead,  he  would  have  the  right  to  return 
to  his  home,  carrying  with  him  a  part  of  the  great 
quantity  of  offerings  that  you  should  have  presented 
to  the  god.  The  gods  command  that  the  priests 
should  honour  them  by  their  good  conduct,  the  prac- 
tice of  virtue,  and  divine  service.  But  it  is  on  the 
city  that  falls  the  obligation  of  offering  sacrifices, 
individually  and  as  a  whole.  Now,  every  one  of 
you  permits  your  wives  to  carry  everything  to  the 
Galileans,  so  that,  with  your  money,  they  feed  the 
poor,  thus  making  atheism  appear  most  admirable 
to  those  in  want.  And  these  form  the  greatest 
number.  And  you  imagine  that  you  do  no  evil  in 
omitting  to  honour  the  gods.  No  poor  people 
present  themselves  at  the  temples,  for  there  they 
would  find  nothing  to  feed  them.  But  if  one  of 
you  celebrate  a  birthday,  behold !  he  prepares  a 
sumptuous  dinner  and  supper,  and  invites  his 
friends  to  a  well-spread  table.  But  when  the 
annual  festival  comes  round,  no  one  brings  oil  for 
the  candelabra  of  the  god,  neither  libations,  victims, 
nor  incense.  I  do  not  know  how  a  wise  man 
would  judge  you  if  he  saw  your  conduct,  but  I 
at  least  am  sure  that  it  is  displeasing  to  the 
gods.'  " 

This  little  history  narrated  by  Julian  and  the 
discourse  that  he  made  are  among  the  most  curious 
and  instructive  episodes  in  the  small  pamphlet  that 
is,  in  every  respect,  so  interesting.  Poor  enthusiast ! 
How  entirely  must  he  have  been  disillusioned  by 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION  455 


the  evidence  of  facts  and  the  luminous  proofs  of 
the  complete  failure  of  the  restoration  he  had 
attempted !  Polytheism  was  dead,  and  neither 
nobility  of  mind  nor  strength  of  soul  could  reanimate 
it.  The  very  corruption  of  a  great  city  that  was 
able  to  maintain  at  the  same  time  its  depraved 
customs  and  Christianity,  demonstrated  that 
Christianity  had  lost  much  of  its  sacredness.  It 
had,  on  the  other  hand,  acquired  the  faculty  of 
adapting  itself  to  the  prevailing  atmosphere, 
without  which  no  institution  can  live.  Julian 
wished  to  render  the  world  moral  by  means  of  a 
reformed  polytheism,  transfusing  into  it  those 
virtues  that  even,  when  taught  by  the  Christians, 
had  not  been  able  to  put  a  stop  to  the  social 
demoralisation.  This,  from  an  intellectual  point  of 
view,  was  quite  an  impossible  enterprise,  because 
exhausted  polytheism,  as  we  have  repeatedly 
explained,  did  not  offer  sufficient  basis  for  a  religious 
reconstruction,  and  likewise,  from  the  moral  point  of 
view,  it  was  impossible,  because  this  alliance  of  the 
"Ch"  with  the  K,"  as  Julian  calls  it— of  Christ 
and  Constantius,  of  God  with  depraved  society, 
which  to  Julian  seemed  monstrous — responded  to 
the  necessities  of  the  time,  and  was  the  formula 
that  expressed  its  exigencies.  But  how  amusing 
in  its  comicality  is  the  encounter,  in  the  deserted 
temple  of  Apollo,  between  Julian  and  the  poor 
priest  who  is  bringing  his  goose  to  the  god  of  the 
Muses !    And  how  symptomatic  is  the  naivete  of 


456 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Julian  in  making  this  episode  the  text  of  a 
speech  before  the  Council  of  Antioch !  And  how 
much  light  is  thrown  on  the  character  of  Julian's 
intentions  by  the  fact  that  this  speech  is  so 
imbued  with  Christianity,  that,  by  simply  altering 
a  few  names  and  certain  secondary  particulars,  it 
could  have  served,  and  might  even  at  present  serve, 
a  bishop  who  wishes  to  reprove  his  flock  for  their 
lack  of  zeal  in  the  divine  ministry  ! 

"  These,"  —  Julian  ironically  continues,^  —  "I 
remember,  were  my  words.  .  .  .  And  by  becoming 
angry  with  you,  I  made  a  mistake.  It  would  have 
been  much  better  if  I  had  held  my  tongue,  like 
many  of  those  who  came  with  me,  and  neither 
worried  myself  nor  scolded  you.  But  I  was 
influenced  by  ill-humour  and  foolish  vanity,  since 
it  is  incredible  that  benevolence  could  have 
inspired  me  with  those  words  ;  the  truth  is,  I  was 
pretending  to  appear  devoted  to  the  gods,  and 
benevolent  towards  you.  And  this  is  ridiculous 
vanity.  I,  therefore,  overwhelmed  you  with  use- 
less reproofs.  And  you  were  right  to  defend 
yourselves  and  exchange  positions  with  me.  I 
abused  you  before  a  few,  near  the  altar  of  the 
god,  at  the  foot  of  his  statue.  You,  on  the  con- 
trary, abused  me  in  the  market-place,  before  the 
whole  population,  among  the  citizens  disposed  to 
amuse  themselves.  .  .  .  Therefore  your  jokes 
about  this  ugly  beard,  and  about  him  who  never 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  469,  12  sq. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


457 


did  and  never  will  adopt  your  pretty  manners  or 
imitate  the  style  of  life  which  you  desire  to  be 
adopted  by  your  sovereign,  were  heard  all  over 
the  city.    But  as  regards  the  insults  which,  privately 
and  publicly,  you  have  showered  on  me,  deriding 
me  in  your  stanzas,  I  give  you  full  liberty  to  use 
them  as  you  like,  considering  that  I  am  the  first 
to  accuse  myself,  so  that,  on  this  head,  I  will  never 
do  you  any  harm,  and  I  will  neither  kill  you,  nor 
flog  you,  nor  imprison  you,  nor  fine  you.    On  the 
contrary,  listen  to  me.    Since  the  wisdom  exhibited 
by  myself  and  my  friends  has  been  considered  by 
you  as  ignoble  and  displeasing,  and  as  I  have  not 
succeeded  in  presenting  you  with  a  spectacle  to 
your  taste,  I  have  decided  to  leave  the  city  and 
go   elsewhere.      Not    that    I,    for    a  moment, 
suppose  that  I  shall  please  those  among  whom  I 
will  go,  but  I  consider  it  best,  even  though  I  may 
not  be  acceptable  to  them,  and  may  not  seem  to 
them  just  and  good,  to  distribute  among  all  the 
blighting  shadow  of  my  presence,  and  not  torment 
too  much  this  city  with  the  bad  odour  of  my 
temperance  and  the  wisdom  of  my  friends.  After 
all,  none  of  us  have  bought  fields  or  gardens,  nor 
built  houses,  nor  taken  wives,  nor  have  become 
enamoured  of  your  beauty,  nor  envied  your  Assyrian 
wealth,  nor  have  we  distributed  amono;  ourselves 
the  prefectures,  nor  permitted  the  abuses  of  the 
magistrates,  nor  have  we  induced  the  population 
to  incur  great  and  lavish  expenses  for  banquets 


458 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


and  theatres — this  population  whom  we  have  made 
so  prosperous,  and  so  entirely  free  from  all  fear  of 
want  that  they  have  time  for  writing  stanzas 
against  those  who  are  the  criminal  authors  of  their 
prosperity.  And  we  did  not  demand  either  gold, 
or  silver,  nor  have  we  increased  the  taxes.  On 
the  contrary,  we  have  condoned,  together  with  the 
arrears,  a  fifth  of  the  usual  impost.  ...  As  it 
appeared,  therefore,  to  us  that  all  this  was  praise- 
worthy, and  praiseworthy  also  the  moderation  and 
wisdom  of  your  sovereign,  it  seemed  natural 
that,  because  of  this,  we  should  have  gained 
your  good  graces.  However,  since  you  are  dis- 
pleased with  my  rough  cheeks  and  my  unkempt 
hair,  my  absence  from  the  theatres,  my  insistence 
on  serious  behaviour  in  the  temples,  and,  above 
all,  my  vigilance  concerning  the  tribunals,  and  the 
severity  with  which  I  repressed  the  greed  of  gain 
so  prevalent  in  the  markets,  I  shall  most  willingly 
leave  the  city.  For  it  would  not  be  easy  for  me, 
now  that  I  am  nearing  mature  age,  to  avoid  that 
which,  according  to  the  fable,  happened  to  the 
kite.  It  is  said  that  the  kite  having  a  voice 
similar  to  that  of  other  birds,  decided,  in  its  mind, 
to  neigh  like  a  colt.  And  so,  having  forgotten 
how  to  sing,  and  not  being  able  to  learn  how  to 
neigh,  it  found  itself  unable  to  do  either,  and  finished 
by  having  a  voice  worse  than  that  of  any  other 
bird.  And  I  believe  that  the  same  thino;  would 
happen  to  me,  that  is  to  say,  I  should  be  neither 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION  459 


rough  nor  gentle,  because  I  am,  please  God,  nearing, 
as  you  see,  the  moment  at  which,  as  the  poet  of 
Theos  sings,  '  the  white  hairs  mix  with  the  black.' 

But  by  all  the  gods,  and  by  Jove,  protector  of 
this  city,  you  expose  yourself  to  the  accusation  of 
being  ungrateful.  Were  you  ever  offended  by  me 
either  in  private  or  in  public?  Or  shall  we  say 
that,  unable  to  obtain  justice,  you  have  used  your 
verses  to  make  our  name  a  by-word  in  the  public 
squares,  and  revile  us  as  the  actors  do  Bacchus 
and  Hercules?  Is  it  not  perhaps  true  that  I 
abstained  from  doing  harm  to  you,  but  did  not 
prevent  you  from  speaking  evil  of  me,  so  now  I 
am  forced  to  defend  myself  against  you  ?  What, 
then,  is  the  cause  of  your  insults  and  your  anger? 
.  .  .  When  I  see  that  I  have  not  in  any  way 
diminished  the  popular  expenditure  which  was  at 
the  charge  of  the  Imperial  treasury,  and  have,  on 
the  contrary,  to  no  small  extent,  diminished  taxation, 
is  it  not  natural  that  your  actions  should  appear 
enigmatical  to  me  ?  But  of  all  I  have  awarded 
you  in  common  with  my  other  subjects,  it  is  best 
that  I  should  say  nothing,  as  I  might  appear  to 
be  singing  my  own  praises,  while  I  had  promised 
to  cover  myself  with  the  vilest  vituperation.  Let 
us  rather  examine  my  personal  conduct,  which 
although  not  deserving  your  ingratitude,  was, 
perhaps,  inconsiderate  and  thoughtless,  and  because 
I  was  guilty  of  many  more  serious  faults  than  those 
aforementioned,  i.e.,  the  untidiness  of  my  appear- 


460  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


ance  and  my  reserve  in  all  that  concerns  love, 
which,  being  more  true,  is  naturally  more  culpable. 
First  I  began  with  great  tenderness  to  sing  your 
praises,  without  waiting  for  experience,  and  without 
taking  the  necessary  steps  towards  a  mutual  under- 
standing, only  remembering  that  you  were  sons 
of  Greece,  and  that  I  myself,  though  a  Thracian 
by  birth,  am  a  Greek  by  education,  I  naturally 
supposed  that  our  affection  would  be  reciprocal. 
This  was  the  first  error,  entirely  due  to  my  thought- 
lessness." 

Julian  then  mentions  certain  facts  of  his  admini- 
stration in  which  he  had  given  evidence  of  his  good- 
will, but  which,  notwithstanding,  were  taken  in  bad 
part  by  the  Antiochians.    He  then  continues  :^ — 

*'  But  all  this  was  of  little  importance,  and  could 
not  have  made  the  city  inimical  to  me.  We  now 
come  to  the  principal  fact  which  gave  birth  to  this 
bitter  hatred.  Almost  immediately  after  my  arrival, 
the  people,  oppressed  by  the  rich,  began  to  shout 
at  me  in  the  theatres  :  '  Everything  is  in  plenty, 
but  everything  is  too  dear ! '  The  following  day,  I 
held  a  conference  with  the  elders  of  the  city,  and 
sought  to  persuade  them  that  it  was  necessary  to 
renounce  illicit  gains,  in  order  to  improve  the 
condition  of  the  citizens  and  the  strano^ers.  The 
elders  promised  me  that  they  would  study  the 
question,  but,  after  three  months  of  waiting,  they 
had  studied  it  so  little  that  it  seemed  as  if  nothing 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  476,  i  sq. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION  461 


would  come  of  it.  When  I  saw  that  the  people's 
complaint  was  well-founded,  and  that  the  market 
was  suffering,  not  for  lack  of  merchandise,  but  on 
account  of  the  rapacity  of  the  proprietors,  I 
established  and  decreed  a  just  price  for  all 
things.  There  was  abundance  of  all,  of  wine,  of 
oil,  and  of  the  rest ;  but  grain  was  lacking,  on 
account  of  the  drought  which  had  caused  a  very 
short  crop.  For  this  I  sent  to  Chalcis,  to 
Hierapolis,  and  to  the  other  surrounding  cities, 
and  had  forty  myriads  of  measures  [of  grain] 
imported  here.  All  this  having  been  con- 
sumed, I  ordered,  first  five  thousand  ;  then  seven 
thousand ;  and,  lastly,  ten  thousand  of  those 
measures  called  '  modia,'  and  besides,  all  the  grain 
that  had  come  to  me  from  Egypt  I  handed  over  to 
the  city,  making  the  same  price  for  fifteen  *  modia ' 
as  had  at  first  been  demanded  for  ten.  ...  In  the 
meanwhile,  what  were  the  rich  people  doing  ? 
They  secretly  sold  at  a  high  price  the  grain  they 
had  in  their  fields,  and  by  their  private  consumption 
aggravated  the  general  condition.^  ...  I,  there- 
fore, fell  from  your  good  graces,  because  I  would 
not  permit  that  wine,  fruit,  and  vegetables  should  be 
sold  to  you  for  their  weight  in  gold,  or  that,  at 
your  expense,  the  grain  stored  away  in  the  granaries 
of  the  rich  should  be  turned  into  gold  and  silver. 
.  .  .  I  well  knew  that,  in  so  doing,  I  would  not 

^  See  for  this  episode  of  the  price  of  provisions,  Liban.,  'ETrtrd^. 
587,  10,  and  Autobiog.,  85,  5. 


462 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


please  all,  but  that  was  not  of  the  slightest  import- 
ance to  me,  since  I  considered  it  my  duty  to  come 
to  the  aid  of  the  people,  and  of  the  strangers  who 
had  come  here  for  the  love  of  me,  and  of  the  magis- 
trates who  were  with  me.  But  now  that  it  is  best 
for  us  to  go  away,  and  as  the  city  is  of  one  opinion 
concerning  me, — some  hate  me,  and  others,  though 
fed  by  me,  are  ungrateful, — I  also  will  go  and 
establish  myself  among  another  race  and  another 
nationality.  .  .  .  But  why  are  we  hateful  to  you  ? 
Because,  perhaps,  we  have  fed  you  with  our  money, 
that  which,  until  now,  has  never  happened  to  any 
city  ?  And  fed  you  splendidly !  And  did  we  not 
punish  the  thieves  when  caught  red-handed  ? 
Allow  me  to  remind  you  of  one  or  two  facts,  so 
that  it  might  not  be  said  that  all  this  is  mere  rhetoric 
and  the  figment  of  my  imagination.  It  was  asserted 
that  there  existed  three  thousand  lots  of  un- 
cultivated lands,  and  you  were  asking  for  them. 
When  you  got  them,  they  were  apportioned  to 
those  who  did  not  need  them.  I  started  an  in- 
vestigation, and  found  it  to  be  true.  So,  by  taking 
this  land  away  from  those  who  unjustly  had 
possession  of  it,  and  not  troubling  myself  about 
the  unpaid  taxes  (although  they  ought  to  have  paid 
them,  even  more  than  the  others),  I  devoted  the  land 
to  the  most  important  and  urgent  needs  of  the  city. 
In  this  way,  the  breeders  of  race-horses  have,  free 
from  taxes,  three  thousand  lots  of  land,  and  this 
through  me.    And  yet  you  seem  to  believe  that  by 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION 


463 


punishing  thieves  and  evil-doers  I  am  turning  the 
world  upside  down.  Thus  my  speech  returns  to 
where  it  had  started.  I  have  only  myself  to  blame 
for  my  many  ills,  because  I  bestowed  my  favours 
on  those  who  did  not  appreciate  them.  And  this 
is  occasioned  by  my  thoughtlessness,  not  by  your 
free-mindedness.  In  the  future  I  will  manage  to 
be  more  prudent  in  my  actions  regarding  you. 
And  to  you  may  the  gods  grant  the  same  bene- 
volence as  you  have  shown  towards  me,  and  the 
same  honour  as  that  which  you  have  publicly 
offered  me ! " 

With  this  last  shot,  Julian  closes  his  bitter 
satire.  In  the  last  part  it  seems  to  us  that  the 
literary  value  is  weakened,  and  that  anger  has 
taken  the  place  of  irony  in  the  hand  of  the  writer. 
But  it  is  always  extremely  interesting,  because  it 
reveals  with  practical  examples  Julian's  foresight 
and  administrative  zeal — a  zeal  that  sometimes 
overstepped  the  limits  of  prudence,  and  trans- 
gressed the  laws  of  public  economy. 

From  this,  it  does  not  appear  that  it  was  ex- 
clusively religious  and  moral  reasons  that  produced 
the  profound  dissension  between  Julian  and  the 
Antiochians.  There  was  also  a  misunderstanding, 
or,  we  had  better  say,  a  disillusion,  the  fault  of 
which  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  ignorance  of 
economic  laws  which  was  universal  during  the 
reign  of  Julian.    We  must  here  recognise  that  the 


464 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


administrative  prudence  and  unerring  insight  into 
the  true  state  of  things  which  had  guided  JuHan  so 
well  during  his  government  of  Gaul,  failed  him 
entirely,  perhaps  owing  to  his  excessive  desire  to 
curry  favour  with  the  Antiochians  and  open  a  way 
to  obtain  a  greater  influence  over  their  souls.  As 
soon  as  he  arrives  in  Antioch,  Julian  hears  the 
populace  loudly  complaining  of  the  high  price  of 
provisions.  He  examines  the  circumstances,  and 
feels  convinced  that  the  principal  cause  is  the 
greed  of  gain  on  the  part  of  the  proprietors  and 
merchants,  so  he  invites  the  municipal  authorities 
to  arrange  the  matter.  But  three  months  elapse,  and 
these  do  not  arrive  at  any  conclusion  on  the  subject. 
So  Julian  steps  in,  and  fixes  for  all  provisions  a 
price  that  is  not  to  be  exceeded,  and,  as  the  corn 
crop  has  been  very  deficient,  he  imports  from 
other  places  enormous  quantities  of  grain,  and 
fixes  the  price,  which  is  much  inferior  to  that  which 
is  necessitated  by  the  commercial  conditions  of  the 
moment.  This  economic  violence  of  the  Emperor 
had  the  inevitable  result  of  augmenting  the  ills 
which  he  wished  to  diminish.  The  market  of 
Antioch  was,  of  course,  very  soon  cleared  of  those 
provisions  which  were  obliged  to  be  sold  at  a  price 
which  did  not  suit  the  vendors.  The  rich  pro- 
prietors sold  their  grain  at  exorbitant  prices  outside 
Antioch,  and  bought  for  their  use  in  Antioch  that 
which  the  Emperor  ordered  to  be  sold  at  absurdly 
low  prices.    This  caused  an  immense  immigration 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


465 


from  the  country  to  the  city,  and,  in  fact,  a  general 
disorder,  which  upset  all  things,  much  to  the  dis- 
gust and  anger  of  the  highest  class  of  proprietors 
and  merchants,  thus  rendering  the  Emperor  highly 
unpopular,  while  he,  in  his  turn,  attributed  to  party 
prejudice  and  perversity  of  spirit  that  which  actually 
was  only  the  necessary  consequence  of  a  great 
blunder.  Julians  intentions  were  undoubtedly 
kind,  and  inspired  by  a  profound  sentiment  of 
equity.  And  we  can  well  understand  how  Libanius, 
in  his  discourse  to  the  Antiochians,  by  which  he  tries 
to  persuade  them  to  repent  of  their  conduct  towards 
the  Emperor,  is  able  to  say  :  "  I  could  have  wished 
that  you  would  have  admired  the  initiative  of  the 
Emperor,  however  great  might  be  the  difficulties, 
because  he  was  giving  proof  of  a  generous  soul, 
and  wished  to  succour  poverty,  and  thought  it  a 
painful  condition  of  affairs  that  some  should  revel 
in  plenty,  whilst  others  absolutely  lacked  the 
necessaries  of  life,  so  that,  in  a  flourishing  market, 
the  poor  should  have  no  better  consolation  than 
that  of  witnessing  the  pleasures  of  the  rich."^  But 
this  good  intention,  applied  in  complete  ignorance 
of  economic  laws,  simply  ended  by  baulking  its 
own  ends. 

In  the  circles  by  which  Julian  was  surrounded, 
the  Christians  were  held  responsible  for  the  diffi- 
culties and  opposition  that  the  Emperor  had  found 
in  Antioch.    The  discourse  of  Libanius,  which  we 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  i.  492,  15. 

VOL.  II.  — 10 


466  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


have  mentioned  above,  is,  on  this  head,  most  inter- 
esting. It  is  entirely  based  on  the  premise  that 
the  true  authors  of  the  opposition  of  the  Antiochians 
to  JuHan  are  the  Christians,  and  that  the  only- 
possible  way  to  effect  a  reconciliation  is  an  open 
conversion  to  paganism.  Libanius  never  names 
the  Christians,  as  if  it  were  repugnant  to  him  to  call 
attention  to  a  sect  so  odious  and  wicked  ;  but  the 
allusion  is  continual.  It  is  the  Christians  who 
secretly  instigated  the  Antiochians  to  revolt  against 
the  economic  arrangements  of  the  Emperor ;  the 
Christians  who  prevent  the  citizens  from  expressing 
their  repentance  by  abandoning  the  theatres,  the 
public  games,  and  the  habit  of  loafing,  so  general 
in  Antioch,  and  returning  to  the  exercise  of  acts 
inspired  by  true  piety.  Do  not  deceive  your- 
selves" — exclaims  Libanius^ — ''it  is  not  by  pro- 
strating yourselves  on  the  ground,  nor  by  waving 
olive  branches,  nor  by  crowning  yourselves  with 
garlands,  nor  by  shouts,  nor  by  embassies,  nor  by 
sending  a  most  eloquent  orator,  that  you  will  be 
able  to  calm  his  indignation,  but  rather  by  renounc- 
ing your  bad  habits,  and  by  consecrating  the  city 
to  Jove  and  the  other  gods,  with  whom,  long  before 
you  saw  the  Emperor,  you  were  well  acquainted, 
even  when  children  at  school,  by  studying  Homer 
and  Hesiod.  Now  you  acknowledge  that  these 
poets  play  a  most  important  part  in  education,  and 
you  make  the  children  learn  by  heart  and  recite 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  i.  502,  i  sq. 


JULIAN'S  DISILLUSION 


467 


their  verses.  However,  in  things  of  greater  import- 
ance, you  seek  other  teachers,  and  now  that  the 
temples  are  opened,  you  run  away  from  them, 
although  you  so  greatly  grieved  when  they  were 
closed.  And  if  any  one  quotes  Plato  or  Pythagoras 
to  you,  you  bring  forward,  as  your  authorities,  your 
mother  and  your  wife,  and  the  cellarman  and  the 
cook,  and  you  prate  of  your  'now  ancient  faith,'  yet 
you  are  not  ashamed  of  all  this,  but  allow  yourself  to 
be  taken  in  tow  by  those  who  should  be  subservient 
to  your  orders,  and  you  seem  to  see  in  the  circum- 
stance of  having  thought  evil  from  the  beginning 
the  necessity  to  think  evil  unto  the  end.  Just  as  if  a 
person  who  has  the  measles  as  a  child  should  keep 
the  disease  all  his  life.  But  why  should  I  pro- 
long this  speech  ?  The  choice  is  yours  :  either  con- 
tinue to  be  hated,  or  obtain  a  double  advantage,  by 
acquiring  the  favour  of  the  sovereign,  and  by 
recognising  the  gods  who  truly  govern  in  heaven. 
You  are  in  a  position  to  help  yourselves  while  giving 
pleasure  to  others.  In  appearance  you  give,  in 
reality  you  receive." 

Libanius  wishes  to  see  Antioch  reconverted  to 
paganism  and  truly  penitent.  At  this  price  he 
hopes  to  obtain  pardon  for  the  insults  of  which 
they  have  been  culpable  towards  the  Emperor. 
Christianity  is,  for  Libanius,  the  greatest  obstacle, 
not  only  to  a  return  to  the  ancient  faith,  but  also  to 
the  expurgation  of  evil  habits  and  the  purification 
of  the  morals  of  the  city.    And  we  can  see  that, 


468  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


even  in  the  fourth  century,  in  a  city  in  which 
Christianity  was  most  widely  diffused,  the  strength 
of  the  new  religion  lay  in  the  lower  strata  of 
society  and  in  feminine  influence.  How  character- 
istic is  this  contrast  between  the  hiofh  culture  of 
the  intellectual  aristocracy  and  the  humility  of  the 
forces  opposed  to  it !  In  this  the  history  of  nascent 
Christianity  is  truly  betrayed.  Plato  and  Pytha- 
goras, invoked  by  the  partisans  of  the  ancient 
creeds,  found  arrayed  against  them  the  women  of 
the  house,  the  cellarman  and  the  cook.  To  these 
rhetoricians,  to  these  philosophers,  wholly  imbued 
with  Hellenic  art  and  thought,  it  appeared  scandal- 
ous, absurd,  and  ridiculous,  this  contrast  between 
the  highest  manifestations  of  human  intelligence 
and  the  fantastic  and  worthless  lucubrations  of 
ignorant  old  women  and  most  abject  slaves.  How- 
ever, Libanius  and  Julian,  blinded  by  the  glorious 
rays  of  expiring  Hellenism,  were  terribly  short- 
sighted. Four  centuries  of  Christianity  had  taught 
them  nothing.  They  believed  religion  to  be  a 
matter  of  reason,  and  they  were  aghast  at  the 
thought  that  the  affirmations  of  the  cellarman  and 
of  the  cook  were  worth  more  than  those  of  Plato, 
and  they  did  not  perceive  that  the  former,  however 
rude  they  might  be,  came  through  the  cognisance 
of  a  living  God,  and  the  latter,  however  sublime, 
were  only  the  presentment  of  phantoms  exhausted 
and  lifeless. 

The  Misopogon  is  one  of  the  most  important 


JULIANAS  DISILLUSION  469 


documents,  and  the  best  adapted  to  help  us  to 
penetrate  the  intimate  signification  of  the  attempt 
initiated  by  JuHan.    Although  the  truth  has  been 
concealed  and  purposely  misconstrued  by  Christian 
polemics,  the  fact — though  apparently  paradoxical, 
is,  nevertheless,  true — that  Julian  was  moved  by 
an  essentially  moral  intention.    Christianity  had, 
in  no  way,  changed  or  improved  the  moral  con- 
dition of  men.    Christian  Antioch  was  on  a  par 
with    pagan    Antioch,    if   not   worse.  Corrupt 
customs,  orgies,  theatres,  dancers  and  mimes — this 
was  the  spectacle  offered  by  Christian  Antioch. 
And  Julian  awakened  in  them  an  intense  aversion, 
because  the  pagan  Emperor  opposed   the  most 
severe  morality  and  virtue  to  the  vices  of  his 
Christian  subjects.    The  Misopogon  makes  clear 
to  us  the  fact  that  Julian  wished  to  save  Hellenism 
which  was  being  destroyed  by  Christianity  together 
with  its  traditions  of  religion  and  patriotism  ;  but 
Julian   also    hoped   to   find   in    Hellenism  that 
moral  force  which  would  be  sufficient  to  reform 
evil  habits,  and  effect  a  complete  regeneration  of 
mankind — a  force  that  the  Christians  themselves 
had  not  been  able  to  develop  from  the  principles 
which  they  had  proposed.    The  reception  that  the 
corrupt  Antiochians  gave  to  the  exhortations  of  the 
Emperor — a  reception  most  vividly  described  by 
the  Emperor  himself — is  the  strongest  proof  of  the 
Utopian    character    of  the    attempt.  Moralised 
polytheism  would  have  failed  in  the  effort  to  re- 


470 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


generate  mankind,  just  as  Christianity  had  failed. 
Man  remained  what  he  was,  according  to  the 
intellectual  condition  of  the  times.  Religion  has 
neither  the  force  nor  the  possibility  of  controlling 
human  passions  ;  but  it  is  rather  the  passions  that 
bend  and  adapt  religion,  whatever  it  may  be,  to 
their  invincible  exigencies. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


In  the  course  of  our  study  the  singular  nature 
of  this  enthusiastic  prince  has  already  appeared  to 
us  in  all  its  brilliancy.  This  prince,  who  on  the 
throne  of  the  Caesars,  by  attempting  to  realise  an 
impossible  ideal,  foolishly  dissipated  powers  of 
mind  and  soul  which,  had  they  been  liberated  from 
religious  preoccupations,  might  have  made  him  a 
truly  great  emperor.  If  Julian's  reign  had  been 
a  long  one,  and  if  he  had  devoted  himself  entirely 
to  the  defence  and  organisation  of  the  empire,  he 
certainly  could  not  have  arrested,  but  might  have 
retarded,  the  fatal  decadence  of  the  ancient  world, 
and  perhaps  prevented  that  terrible  catastrophe  by 
which  it  was  overwhelmed — the  invasion  of  the 
barbarians. 

Julian's  apparition  on  the  Imperial  throne  may 
be  compared  with  that  of  a  brilliant  and  evanescent 
meteor.  He  did  not,  therefore,  have  time  to 
leave  on  things  and  facts,  the  lasting  imprint  of 
his  personality.  If  his  memory  only  lived  in  the 
caricatures  sketched  by  the  Christian  writers,  and 
if  he  were  exclusively  to  be  judged  from  these,  one 
would  suppose  that  his  life-work  was  restricted 

471 


472 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


to   the  war   he  waged   against   Christianity — in 
short,  that  he  was  a  hateful  and  infamous  man. 
Fortunately,   his  writings    remain,   which   are  a 
genuine  reflection  of  his  intentions,  his  character, 
and  of  the  qualities    and   defects   of  his  noble 
spirit.     It  is  true  that  Libanius  and  Ammianus 
Marcellinus  have  both   furnished   proofs  of  the 
admiration  that   Julian    excited   in   his  contem- 
poraries.   But  Libanius  is  prejudiced,  because  he 
also  was   much  interested  and  compromised  in 
the  enterprise  of  the  polytheistic  restoration,  and 
Ammianus    Marcellinus     is     not    a  sufficiently 
powerful  writer  to   be   opposed   to    Gregory  of 
Nazianzus,  to  Socrates,   Sozomenes,  and   to  all 
the  Catholic  traditions.    So  Julian's  genial  figure 
has  been  handed  down  to  posterity,  bearing  the 
brand  of  apostasy,  and,  from  a  psychological  and 
historical  point  of  view,  the   most  curious  and 
interesting:  fact  of  all  seems  to  have  been  lost 
sight  of,  namely,  that  this  accursed  apostate,  who 
attempted  to  suffocate   Christianity,  was,  in  all 
respects,  an   essentially    virtuous    man,    and  far 
superior  to  any  of  those  men  who  appeared  on  the 
horizon  of  public  life  during  the  Lower  Empire. 
The  good  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  in  the  course 
of  his  panegyric  on  Julian,  after  having  narrated 
his  heroic  death,  says  that  he  was  always  noted 
for  the  chastity  and  temperance  of  his  life,  and 
his   prudence   in   every   action — "virtute  senior 
quam    aetate,    studiosus    cognitionum  omnium, 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  473 


censor  moribus  regendis  acerrimus,  placidus, 
opum  contemptor,  mortalia  omnia  despiciens."  ^ 
Perfect  was  his  justice  tempered  by  clemency, 
most  admirable  his  acquaintance  with  everything 
pertaining  to  war  and  the  authority  with  which 
he  governed  his  soldiers,  unequalled  the  valour 
with  which  he  fought,  always  among  the  first, 
encouraging  his  troops  and  reconducting  them 
in  the  midst  of  the  fray  at  the  first  sign  of  hesi- 
tation. His  administration  was  most  wise  and 
moderate,  so  that  he  was  able  to  lighten  the  taxes 
and  settle  amicably  the  litigation  between  private 
individuals  and  the  Imperial  treasury,  restore  the 
miserable  financial  conditions  of  the  cities,  and, 
finally,  stop  the  frightful  disorder  that  reigned  in 
the  extortionate  and  parasitic  government  of  the 
empire.  But  the  honest  historian  does  not 
conceal  the  failings  of  his  hero  ;  they  are,  however, 
very  light  in  comparison  with  his  virtues.  A 
too  great  hastiness  in  his  decisions,  and  an  ex- 
cessive facility  and  abundance  of  words,  which, 
in  our  opinion,  must  have  been  the  reflection 
of  an  excessively  impressionable  temperament, 
also  easily  detected  among  those  writings  which 
are  the  genuine  expression  of  his  soul.  But 
Julians  gravest  fault,  the  inevitable  consequence 
of  his  philosophical  system,  was  his  tendency  to 
superstition.  This  caused  him  to  attribute  to  the 
exterior   forms    of   the    religion    he   wished  to 

^  Amm.  Marcell.j  op.  cit.^  ii.  40,  29  sq. 


474 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


restore  an  importance  that  often  bordered  on  the 
ridiculous,  and  seriously  militated  against  his 
propaganda.  This  is  the  moral  picture  that 
Ammianus  sketches  of  his  emperor,  whom  he 
furthermore  describes  as  having  a  figure  at  once 
strong  and  agile,  a  face  that  had  a  most  singular 
aspect  on  account  of  the  shaggy  beard  that  finished 
in  a  point, — an  object  of  ridicule  to  the  Antiochians, 
— yet  whose  beauty  was  enhanced  by  his  sparkling 
eyes,  from  which  beamed  the  geniality  of  his  mind 
— **  venustate  oculorum  micantium  fiagrans,  qui 
mentis  ejus  argutias  indicabant." 

But  before  studying  Julian  from  his  writings, 
which  are  undoubtedly  the  most  trustworthy 
source,  we  must  examine  once  more  the  descrip- 
tions given  of  him  by  his  two  contemporaries, 
Libanius  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzus — the  first 
with  the  idea  of  exalting  his  memory,  the  second 
with  the  intention  of  reviling  him  and  bespattering 
him  with  mud.  In  the  course  of  this  study  we 
have  largely  borrowed  from  these  writers,  but  we 
may  still  be  able  to  gather  some  more  interesting 
items  of  information. 

We  begin  by  observing  that,  in  the  lamenta- 
tions of  Libanius  over  the  death  of  Julian,  it  is 
impossible  not  to  recognise  the  expression  of  a 
true  and  profound  sentiment,  which  is  intensified 
if  we  consider  that  the  Necrologia  and  the 
Monodia  were  written  when  all  traces  of  the 
attempt  to   restore   paganism   had  disappeared, 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  475 


when  Christianity  once  more  held  sovereign  sway 
in  the  Court  and  among  the  people,  and  when  the 
expression  of  such  grief  might  prove  a  great 
danorer    to    the    writer.      Libanius  exclaims:^ 

o 

How  can  we  reconcile  ourselves  to  the  thought 
that  the  infamous  Constantius,  after  having  ruled 
over  the  earth  that  he  contaminated  for  forty 
years,  was  only  carried  off  by  illness  ?  And  he 
who  renewed  the  sacred  laws,  reorganised  good 
principles,  rebuilt  the  dwellings  of  the  gods,  re- 
placed the  altars,  recalled  the  company  of  the 
priests  who  were  hiding  in  darkness,  restored  the 
statues,  sacrificed  herds  of  sheep  and  oxen,  now 
in  the  Imperial  palace,  and  again  outside  it, 
sometimes  by  day  and  sometimes  by  night,  leaving 
his  life  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  gods,  who 
after  filling  for  a  short  time  a  minor  position  in 
the  empire,  and  for  a  still  shorter  time  the  highest 
office,^  was  taken  away,  so  that  the  earth  which  had 
just  begun  to  appreciate  such  great  virtue  was 
left  unsatisfied.  ...  At  least,  if  this  multitude  of 
evils  had  not  so  suddenly  overwhelmed  us !  But 
good  fortune  had  no  sooner  appeared  to  us  than  it 
rapidly  vanished  as  if  in  flight.  By  Hercules,  this 
is  too  cruel,  and  must  be  the  work  of  the  demons !  " 
Then  Libanius,  after  recalling  the  desolation  of 
the  army   when   Julian,  mortally    wounded  but 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  510,  5. 

2  The  minor  position  is  that  of  C^sar  ;  the  highest,  that  of 
Augustus. 


476 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


still  alive,  was  transported  from  the  battlefield  to 
his  tent,  says  that  the  Muses  were  weeping  for  the 
death  of  their  pupil,  and  that  misfortune  had 
encompassed  the  earth,  the  sea,  and  the  air,  and 
exclaims:  ''And  all  of  us  weep,  each  one  the  loss 
of  his  particular  hopes  :  the  philosopher,  over  the 
man  who  explained  the  doctrines  of  Plato  ;  the 
rhetorician,  over  the  orator  eloquent  of  speech  and 
skilful  in  criticising  the  discourses  of  others  ;  the 
pleaders,  a  judge  wiser  than  Rhadamanthus.  O 
unfortunate  peasants  who  will  be  the  prey  of 
those  whose  sole  object  is  to  despoil  you !  O 
power  of  justice  already  weakened,  and  of  which 
soon  there  will  only  remain  the  shadow  !  O 
magistrates,  how  much  will  the  dignity  of  your 
names  be  reviled!  O  battalions  of  soldiers,  you 
have  lost  an  emperor  who  in  war  provided  for  all 
your  necessities !  O  laws,  with  reason  believed  to 
have  been  dictated  by  Apollo,  now  trodden  under 
foot !  O  reason,  thou  hast  almost  in  the  same 
moment  acquired  and  lost  thy  sway  and  vigour ! 
Alas  !  for  the  earth's  absolute  ruin  !  "  ^ 

This  explosion  of  grief  is  in  natural  contrast 
to  the  recital  of  the  hopes  and  expectations 
which  Julian  had  aroused.  The  Emperor,  Libanius 
says,  attributed  a  supreme  importance  to  education  ; 
he  believed  that  the  doctrine  and  the  worship  of 
the  gods  should  be  united  by  fraternal  bonds 
(^vojjLt^oov  dBek(j)a  re  teal  Oeoiv  lephy     To  restore 

^  Liban.,  op.  dt.^  516,  15. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  477 


instruction,  which  was  entirely  neglected,  to  its 
former  position  of  honour,  he  himself  wrote  dis- 
courses and  treatises  on  philosophy.  He  also 
desired  that  the  cities  should  be  governed  by 
men  of  culture,  and  as  soon  as  he  found  a  man 
capable  of  ruling,  he  immediately  invested  him 
with  office.  There  is  indeed  a  breath  of  poetic 
inspiration  in  the  enthusiastic  picture  that  Libanius 
gives  of  Julian's  journey  from  Constantinople  to 
Antioch.  The  Emperor  is  moved  by  one  domi- 
nant thought,  the  restoration  of  Hellenism ;  he 
enjoys  discourses  much  more  than  he  does  gifts  ; 
he  weeps  with  emotion,  and  is  consumed  by  his 
prodigious  activity  of  mind  and  of  body,  and  he 
never  neglects  a  temple,  nor  leaves  unheard  a 
philosopher,  rhetorician,  or  poet.  **The  garden 
of  wisdom  blossomed  again  " — exclaims  Libanius 
— ''and  the  chances  of  preferment  lay  in  the  ac- 
quisition of  knowledge.  .  .  .  He  made  all  efforts 
to  revive  the  love  of  the  Muses !"  ^  It  was  truly 
a  '' Primavera  Ellenica,"^  a  reflowering  of  Greek 
thought,  customs,  and  ideas,  that  reanimated  spirits, 
discouraged  and  broken  by  incipient  barbarism,  and 
by  the  predominating  tendencies  that  were  in  open 
contradiction  to  these  ideas  and  customs.  In  order 
to  comprehend,  in  its  bearing  and  significance, 
the   restoration   attempted   by   Julian,  we  must 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  575,  15. 

2  "  Primavera  Ellenica"  is  an  allusion  to  Carducci's  well-known 
poem.— Translator's  Note. 


478  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


endeavour  to  appreciate  the  emotion  of  these 
surviving  devotees  of  a  civilisation  which  was 
rapidly  approaching  its  sunset,  but  which  they 
imagined  could  be  restored  to  its  ancient  splendour 
by  creating  a  retrograde  movement  in  its  predomi- 
nant circumstances. 

Endowed  with  the  faculty  of  concentrating  his 
thoughts,  and  with  prodigious  activity,  Julian  was 
able  to  respond  to  the  excessive  demands  made 
on  him  in  his  task  of  religious  reformer,  general, 
and  statesman.  ''When  obliged  to  be  present  at 
races,"  Libanius  relates,  ''Julian  gazed  abstractedly 
around,  honouring  at  the  same  time  the  festival  by 
his  presence,  and  his  own  thoughts  by  being  ab- 
sorbed in  them.  Neither  wrestling,  competitions, 
nor  applause  could  divert  him  from  his  meditations. 
When  he  gave  a  banquet,  he  remained  just  long 
enough,  so  that  it  could  not  be  said  he  was  absent."  ^ 
Of  his  activity  he  gives  us  this  interesting  descrip- 
tion :  "  Having  always  been  most  abstemious,  and 
never  having  overloaded  his  stomach  with  excessive 
food,  he  was,  if  I  may  so  express  it,  able  to  fly 
from  one  occupation  to  the  other,  and  on  the 
same  day  respond  to  several  ambassadors,  despatch 
letters  to  the  cities,  to  the  commanders  of  his  armies, 
to  friends  who  were  absent  and  to  friends  who 
arrived,  listen  to  the  reading  of  despatches,  and 
examine  requests,  so  that  his  secretaries  were 
unable   to   keep  pace  with   the  rapidity  of  his 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  579,  5. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  479 


dictation.  ...  His  secretaries  were  obliged  to 
rest,  but  not  he,  who  passed  from  one  occupation 
to  another.  After  he  had  transacted  his  official 
affairs,  he  had  luncheon,  —  he  never  ate  more 
than  was  absolutely  necessary, — and  then  sang 
most  melodiously,  resting  amidst  his  books,  until, 
in  the  afternoon,  he  was  once  more  called  to  the 
business  of  the  State.  And  his  supper  was  even 
more  frugal  than  his  first  repast,  and  his  hours  of 
sleep  were  few,  considering  the  small  amount  of 
food.  And  then  came  other  amanuenses,  who  had 
passed  their  day  sleeping,  because  this  succession 
of  service  and  this  resting  by  turns  was  indispen- 
sable. He  changed  the  form  of  his  work,  but  he 
never  ceased  working,  renewing  in  his  actions  the 
transformations  of  Proteus,  alternately  appearing 
in  the  character  of  priest,  writer,  augur,  judge, 
general,  and  soldier,  but  always  as  a  saviour ! "  ^ 
The  cares  of  state  did  not  prevent  him  from 
continuing  his  favourite  studies.  In  another  part, 
Libanius,  addressing  himself  to  Julian,  thus  exclaims: 
"  Thy  great  and  beautiful  and  varied  culture  is  not 
exclusively  due  to  the  studies  that  thou  hast  made 
before  thou  didst  become  Emperor!  But  thou  con- 
tinuest  to  study  simply  for  the  love  of  wisdom.  The 
Empire  did  not  force  thee  to  neglect  thy  books. 
The  night  is  still  young  and  thou  already  singest, 
awaking  earlier  than  the  birds,  composing  thy  dis- 
courses, and  reading  the  compositions  of  others  !  " 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit..,  580,  10  sq. 


480  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


In  another  part,  Libanius  breaks  out  in  the 
following  apostrophe  to  the  gods,  and  it  is  most 
interesting  because  it  reveals  how  many  and 
deep-seated  were  the  illusions  cherished  by  the 
Hellenistic  party  who  surrounded  Julian,  and 
because  we  seem  to  hear  in  it  the  echo  of  the 
enthusiastic  conversations  that  must  have  taken 
place  at  Antioch  between  the  Emperor  and 
Libanius,  when  the  former  was  preparing  to 
give,  by  means  of  his  hoped-for  victory  over 
the  Persians,  the  definite  seal  and  sanction  to 
the  reconstruction  of  ancient  civilisation. 

"O  gods,  O  demons,  why  did  ye  not  ratify 
your  promises  ?  Why  did  ye  not  make  him  happy 
who  knew  you  ?  With  what  could  ye  reproach 
him  ?  What  was  there  in  his  actions  that  was 
not  praiseworthy  ?  Did  he  not  restore  the  altars  ? 
Did  he  not  build  temples  ?  Did  he  not  honour 
with  the  greatest  solemnity  the  gods,  the  heroes, 
the  air,  the  heavens,  the  earth,  the  sea,  the 
fountains,  the  rivers  ?  Were  not  your  enemies 
his  enemies?  Was  he  not  wiser  than  Hippolytus  ? 
Just  as  Rhadamanthus?  More  thoughtful  than 
Themistocles  ?  More  courageous  than  Brasidas  ? 
Did  he  not  truly  save  humanity,  which  was  on  the 
point  of  perishing?  W^as  he  not  the  enemy  of 
the  wicked  ?  Merciful  to  the  righteous  ?  Adverse 
to  the  overbearing  ?  A  friend  to  the  simple-minded  ? 
How  grand  were  his  enterprises!  How  many 
conquests!     How  many  trophies!     O  end  un- 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  481 


worthy  of  the  beginning!  We  believed  that  the 
whole  of  Persia  would  form  part  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  governed  by  our  laws,  receiving  from  us 
its  rulers,  paying  us  its  tributes,  changing  its 
language,  altering  its  style  of  dress,  and  cutting 
the  flowing  hair.  In  our  mind's  eye  we  saw  in 
Susa  sophists  and  rhetoricians,  educating  with 
their  great  discourses  the  sons  of  the  Persians, 
and  our  temples  ornamented  with  the  spoils 
brought  from  there,  narrating  to  posterity  the 
magnitude  of  the  victory,  and  the  conquered 
themselves  emulating  those  who  praised  the 
enterprise,  admiring  this,  and  not  making  light 
of  that,  congratulating  themselves  because  of 
some  things,  and  not  disdainful  of  others,  and 
wisdom  honoured  as  it  formerly  had  been,  and 
the  tombs  of  the  martyrs  give  place  to  temples, 
and  all  with  one  accord  crowd  around  the  altars, 
rebuilt  by  those  who  had  destroyed  them,  and  the 
very  same  who  ran  away  in  horror  at  the  sight  of 
blood,  offer  up  sacrifices,  and  the  prosperity  of 
families  revived  through  many  causes  ;  by  the  re- 
duction of  taxes,  because  it  is  reported  that,  in 
the  midst  of  dangers,  he  had  prayed  the  gods 
that  if  the  war  terminated  in  a  manner  that 
rendered  it  possible,  he  would  reduce  to  nothing 
the  public  taxes.  Ah !  the  crowd  of  adverse 
demons  rendered  vain  all  our  expectations,  and 
behold !  the  athlete  about  to  receive  the  laurel 
crown  is  brought  to  us  on  his  bier !    Happy  those 

VOL.  II. —  II 


482  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


who  died  after  him,  unhappy  those  who  live ! 
Before  him  there  was  night,  and  after  him  there 
is  night ;  his  reign  was  a  pure  ray  of  sunHght ! 
O  cities  that  thou  hast  founded !  O  cities  that 
thou  hast  rebuilt !  O  wisdom  that  thou  hast 
exalted  to  the  highest  honour!  O  virtue  that 
was  thy  strength!  O  justice  descended  anew 
from  heaven  to  earth,  thence  to  return  immedi- 
ately to  heaven !  O  radical  revolution !  O 
universal  happiness,  no  sooner  realised  than 
ended !  We  suffer  like  a  thirsty  man  who  raises 
to  his  lips  a  cup  of  fresh  and  limpid  water,  but, 
as  it  touches  them,  he  sees  it  snatched  away !  "  ^ 
Libanius  thus  narrates  Julian  s  conversion  : — 
As  it  appeared  that,  in  every  respect,  he  was 
made  to  rule,  and  this  being  the  general  opinion  of 
those  who  knew  him,  he  (the  Emperor  Constantius) 
did  not  wish  that  his  fame  should  become  too 
widespread  among  the  population  of  a  city  wherein 
were  many  restless  spirits.  He,  therefore,  sent 
him  to  Hve  in  Nicomedia,  a  more  quiet  city.  This 
was  the  beginning  of  every  good  for  him  and  for 
all  the  world,  for  in  that  city  there  yet  remained  a 
breath  of  divine  science,  which  with  difficulty  had 
escaped  the  hands  of  the  impious  ones.  Scrutinis- 
ing by  means  of  this  the  occult  questions," — here 
Libanius  addresses  himself  directly  to  Julian, — 
thou,  ennobled  by  study,  hast  divested  thyself  of 
thy  fierce  hatred  of  the  gods.    When,  later,  thou 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  617,  5  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  483 


didst  go  to  Ionia,  and  didst  make  the  acquaintance 
of  a  man  who  is  credible  and  wise/  hearing  that 
which  he  taught  concerning  those  spirits  who  have 
created  and  preserved  the  universe,  and  admiring 
the  beauty  of  philosophy,  thou  didst  taste  the  most 
pure  of  all  beverages,  and  shaking  thyself  free  from 
error,  and,  Hke  a  lion,  breaking  thy  chains,  thou 
didst  liberate  thyself  from  the  mist  of  ignorance, 
preferring  truth  to  falsehood,  the  legitimate 
divinities  to  the  false  one,  the  ancient  gods  to 
that  one  who,  some  time  ago,  has  perfidiously 
insinuated  himself.  Uniting  to  the  companionship 
of  the  rhetoricians  that  of  men  still  more  wise  (and 
even  here  we  see  the  hand  of  the  gods,  who,  by 
means  of  Plato,  expanded  thy  intelligence,  so  that 
with  high  conceptions  thou  wert  able  to  attain  to 
greatness  of  action),  already  strong  by  thy  flow 
of  words  and  by  the  science  of  things,  even  before 
thou  couldst  promote  the  interests  of  religion,  thou 
didst  let  it  be  understood  that  thou  wouldst  not 
neglect  them  when  the  occasion  presented  itself, 
lamenting  over  that  which  had  been  destroyed, 
grieving  over  that  which  had  been  contaminated, 
commiserating  that  which  had  been  oppressed, 
making  evident  to  those  near  thee,  future  salva- 
tion in  the  present  grief."  ^ 

After  describing  Julian's  action  in  Gaul, 
Libanius  thus  exclaims  :  "  Certainly  thou  couldst 

1  Probably  Libanius  here  alludes  to  Maximus. 

2  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  40S,  5  sq. 


484  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


not  have  done  all  this  without  the  help  of  Minerva. 
But  from  the  time  that  thou  didst  leave  Athens, 
the  goddess  assisting  thee  in  counsel  and  action 
as  she  had  once  assisted  Hercules  to  overcome  the 
monstrous  dog,  thou  wert  able  to  comprehend  all 
things  by  means  of  reason,  and  didst  make  the 
best  use  of  thy  arms,  not  remaining  seated  in  thy 
tent  to  await  the  reports  of  the  battle.  Thou  wert, 
instead,  ever  to  be  found  in  the  van  of  the  army, 
inciting  thy  troops  to  follow  thee,  flourishing  thy 
lance,  brandishing  thy  sword,  calling  them  on  by 
the  gesture  of  thy  uplifted  arm,  and  encouraging 
thy  soldiers  with  the  blood  of  the  enemy  ;  a  king  in 
council,  a  leader  in  all  enterprises,  a  hero  in  battle!"^ 
The  pages  of  Libanius  present  to  us  a  figure 
both  attractive  and  genial.  A  man  of  spirit  and 
courage,  full  of  enthusiasm  for  all  the  most  noble 
ideals,  generous  and  heroic,  the  young  Emperor 
appears  truly  worthy  of  the  admiration  and  love 
with  which  his  teachers,  his  friends,  and  his  soldiers 
encompassed  him.  But  certainly  Julian  lacked 
balance.  His  fervid  and  disordered  imagination 
was  combined,  in  the  most  extraordinary  manner, 
with  all  the  pedantry  of  the  rhetorician  and 
formalist.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  there  is 
so  much  heroism  in  his  heart,  he  is  so  overflowing 
with  the  vigour  and  boldness  of  youth,  he  embodies 
so  thoroughly  the  living  spirit  of  Hellenic  civilisa- 
tion, that  his  personality  seems  to  be  liberated 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  413,  10  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


485 


from  all  its  errors  and  defects,  or,  at  least,  they  are 
concealed  by  the  pure  rays  of  a  dazzling  light. 
But  one  of  these  blemishes  remains,  and  is  but  too 
evident,  and  dominates  even  in  the  portrait  sketched 
by  Libanius.    This  blemish  was  superstition.  We 
have  already  noticed  this  in  our  remarks  concern- 
ing   Neo-Platonism  ;    antiquity   was,    above  all, 
superstitious.      For   it   to  have  been  otherwise, 
human  thougrht  must  have  followed  the  direction 
indicated  by  Democritus,  Epicurus,  and  Lucretius. 
On  the  contrary,  it  chose  the  opposite  direction, 
and,  by  means  of  Neo-Platonism,  it  ended  by  placing 
the  superrational  and  the  supernatural  above  reason 
and  nature,  that  is  to  say,  it  refused  to  seek  the 
logical  causes  of  effects,  and  saw  in  all  things  the 
continual  intervention  of  an  absolute  arbiter.  No 
one  more  than  Julian  pressed  onward  in  this  fatal 
direction,  none,  therefore,  more  ardent  than  he  in 
promoting  those  exercises  of  the  cult  which  he 
believed  would  give  him  the  favour  of  the  gods. 
"  On  all  sides  " — exclaims  Libanius — "  there  were 
altars,  and  fires,  and  blood,  and  reek  of  sacrifices, 
and  incense  and  expiations,  and  soothsayers  free 
from  all  restraint.    There  were  pilgrimages  and 
singing  on  the  summits  of  the  mountains,  and  oxen 
that  he  (Julian),  sacrificing  with  his  own  hands, 
offered  to  the  gods,  and  with  the  meat  of  which  he 
afterwards  fed  the  people.    But  as  it  was  incon- 
venient for  the  Emperor  to  go  every  day  from  the 
Imperial  palace  to  visit  the  temples,  and  as  at  the 


486 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


same  time  there  is  nothing  more  profitable  than 
constant  intercourse  with  the  gods,  he  had  erected, 
inside  the  palace,  a  sanctuary  to  the  god  who 
brings  the  day,  and  he  participated  and  made  the 
others  participate  in  those  Mysteries  in  which  he 
had  been  initiated,  and  he  raised  separate  altars  to 
each  of  the  gods.  And  the  first  thing  he  did  as 
soon  as  he  arose  from  his  bed  was  to  unite  himself 
by  sacrifice  to  the  gods."  ^  And  in  the  Monodia, 
deploring  the  death  of  his  hero,  he  thus  asks  : 
''Which  of  the  gods  should  we  accuse?  All 
equally,  because  they  have  neglected  the  care  of 
that  beloved  head,  a  care  due  to  it,  in  return  for 
the  many  prayers  and  the  many  offerings,  the 
continual  perfumes,  the  quantity  of  blood  shed  by 
night  and  by  day.  He  was  not  devoted  to  one  and 
negligent  of  the  others,  but  to  all  those  who  have 
been  made  known  to  us  by  the  poets  :  the  generators 
and  the  generated,  gods  and  goddesses,  superior 
and  inferior,  he  offered  libations,  and  their  altars 
were  filled  to  overflowing  with  oxen  and  sheep."  ^ 

Furthermore,  he  was  especially  devoted  to  the 
science  of  augury,  and  Libanius  relates  that  he 
was  so  expert  in  it  that  when  he  was  present,  the 
augurs  were  obliged  to  adhere  strictly  to  the  truth, 
because  his  eyes  were  able  to  scrutinise  and 
discover  all."  And  we  have  already  seen  that, 
in  all  his  undertakings,  he  was  accompanied  by 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  564,  15  sq.  ^  /^^/^.^  op.  cit.y  508,  10. 

3  Ibid.j  op.  cit.^  582,  10. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  487 


numbers  of  augurs,  and  that  he  never  attempted 
anything  without  having  first  examined  the  entrails 
of  the  victims,  and  the  birds  in  their  flight.  And 
honest  Ammianus,  with  his  good  sense,  recognises 
that  the  Emperor  was  addicted  to  an  excessive  use 
of  omens,  and  was  more  a  superstitious  than  a 
legitimate  observer  of  the  cult — prsesagiorum 
sciscitationi  nimiae  deditus  .  .  .  superstitiosus  magis 
quam  sacrorum  legitimus  observator."  ^ 

To  us  all  this  seems  perfectly  odious,  and  it 
would  appear  that,  in  the  re-establishment  of 
sanguinary  sacrifices,  and  in  his  attempt  to  revive 
puerile  and  absurd  rites,  he  was  really  proving 
himself  a  reactionary.  One  of  the  most  evident 
merits  of  Christianity  is  especially  that  of  having 
purified  worship  and  of  having  freed  the  altars 
from  the  repulsive  spectacle  of  victims  with  their 
throats  cut.  But  if  we  examine  the  inwardness  of 
this  question,  we  shall  find  that  the  conception  of  a 
sacrifice,  redeeming  the  sins  and  obtaining  the 
pardon  of  the  god,  exists  on  both  sides,  collective 
and  symbolical  in  Christianity,  real  and  uninter- 
rupted in  paganism.  Christianity — we  do  not  mean 
that  of  the  Gospel,  which  simply  posed  the  sublime 
idea  of  a  paternal  God,  but  metaphysical  and 
dogmatic  Christianity — has  introduced  into  the  cult 
offered  to  the  divinity  new  forms,  and  much  better 
ones,  but  it  has  not  originated  any  new  ideas.  The 
principle,  essentially  superstitious,  of  an  omnipotent 

1  Amm.  MarcelL,  op.  cit.^  ii.  42,  30. 


488  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


arbiter,  to  be  appeased  by  dint  of  victims,  had  not 
been  eradicated.  Julian,  even  on  this  score,  was 
neither  reactionary  nor  progressive.  He  did 
nothing  else  but  live  and  act  according  to  the 
intellectual  environment  of  his  times. 

Notwithstanding  that  he  was  deeply  tainted 
with  superstition  and  bigotry,  Julian,  as  depicted  by 
Ammianus  and  the  enthusiastic  Libanius,  presents 
a  most  attractive  figure,  both  as  man  and  sovereign. 
We  are  drawn  to  lament  his  errors  and  misfortunes, 
and  feel  for  him  that  sympathy  and  admiration  which 
is  always  inspired  by  men  of  genius.  Gregory  of 
Nazianzus  presents  a  figure  absolutely  the  reverse, 
and  were  we  to  give  credence  to  his  description, 
we  should  believe  Julian  to  have  been  a  wicked 
man,  and  one  deficient  in  intelligence.  The  hero 
of  the  enterprises  against  Gaul  and  Persia,  the 
man  of  severe  habits  and  principles,  the  brilliant 
and  versatile  writer,  is  transformed,  in  the  Dis- 
courses of  Gregory,  into  that  dragon,  that  apostate, 
that  artful  schemer,  that  Assyrian,  that  common 
enemy  and  corrupter  of  all,  who  has  poured  out 
on  the  earth  his  ire  and  his  threats,  and  has  hurled 
even  up  to  heaven  his  iniquitous  words."  ^  And 
the  writings  of  Julian  are  ''malicious  discourses  and 
jests,  their  only  strength  being  found  in  their  profane- 
ness,  and  in  the  wisdom,  if  I  may  so  say,  of  a  fool."^ 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  49. 

^  Ibid.^  op.  cit..^  50.    d(To(})os  ii/'  avTMS  ovoixxaco,  aocfiia. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  489 


So  great  was  Gregory's  hatred  of  Julian  that 
the  pious  writer,  in  order  to  give  greater  force 
to  the  accusations  of  perfidy  which  he  brought 
against  him,  did  not  hesitate  to  become  the 
enthusiastic  apologist  of  the  Emperor  Constantius. 
Here  we  have  an  intentional  and  deplorable 
concealment  of  the  truth.  For  we  must  remember 
that  the  Arian  Constantius  had  been  not  only  a 
fierce  persecutor  of  the  pagans,  but  also  of 
Orthodoxy,  so  that  the  great  Athanasius  had 
to  bear  the  brunt  of  his  anger.  But  Gregory 
is  so  anxious  to  exalt  Julian's  enemy,  that  he 
dares  to  excuse  him,  the  persecutor  of  his 
brothers  in  Christ,  asserting  that  the  Emperor 
was  only  influenced  by  his  desire  to  bring  back 
unity  into  the  divided  Church,  and  in  saying  this, 
he  forgets  that  union  with  the  Arian  errors  was 
detestable  and  fatal. ^  And  he  lessens  the  import- 
ance of  the  heresy  of  Constantius,  by  attributing 
it  to  the  influence  of  others.  It  seemed,  he  says, 
that  Constantius  inflicted  a  Q^reat  shock  on  Ortho- 
doxy.^  But  this  appearance  must  be  accredited 
to  those  around  him,  who  had  deceived  a  simple 
soul  overflowing  with  virtue.  And,  after  all,  the 
polemist  exclaims,  we  cannot  forget  that  he  is 
the  son  of  the  Emperor  who  gave  the  founda- 
tion of  Imperial  power  to  the  Christian  faith. ^ 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  64. 

^  Ibid.^  op.  cit.    TTjv  6p6i)v  bo^av  napaKivfiv  e8o^€v. 
^  Ibid.^  op.  cit.    TOP  ^aXX6fjL€vov  ttjv  Kpy^nida  Trjs  QaaiKiKrjs  tco  xP'-^t'-o.- 
vi(r^(o  dwaareias  Koi  nicTTeccs. 


490 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


And  we  cannot  forget  that  Constantius,  when 
he  died,  left  Christianity  all  powerful.^  There 
is  no  greater  proof  of  the  blindness  of  passion, 
and  also  of  the  moral  distortion  into  which  Chris- 
tianity had  fallen,  than  this  praise  and  exaltation 
of  a  tyrannical,  heretical,  and  cruel  emperor  by 
one  of  the  princes  of  the  Church. 

In  Gregory's  Discourses,  Julian  becomes  a 
sort  of  infernal  demon,  around  whom  all  sorts  of 
dark  and  stupid  legends  have  accumulated. 
Once,  while  he  was  sacrificing,  the  viscera  of 
the  victim  took  the  form  of  a  crowned  cross ;  the 
spectators  were  terrified,  but  the  wicked  apostate 
explained  the  apparition,  saying  that  it  was  a 
symbol  of  the  discomfiture  of  Christianity.^  On 
another  occasion,  Julian,  guided  by  a  master  of 
the  sacred  Mysteries,  descends  into  a  cavern. 
And  behold !  he  hears  the  most  awful  noises,  and 
most  horrible  phantoms  appear  to  him.  Julian, 
overcome  by  fear,  almost  involuntarily,  as  a 
defence  against  those  foul  demons,  recurs  to  that 
exorcism  to  which  he  has  been  accustomed  since 
his  childhood,  and  makes  the  sign  of  the  cross. 
Immediately  the  noises  cease,  and  the  demons 
disappear.  Twice  is  this  strange  experience 
repeated,  and  each  time  Julian  proves  the  power 
of  the  Christian  exorcism.  He  is  deeply  impressed, 
but  the  master  of  iniquity,  who  is  near  him,  says 
to  him  :  ''What  dost  thou  fear?    The  demons  dis- 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  119.  ^  Ibid.^  op.  cit.^  70  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  491 


appear,  not  because  they  are  afraid  of  the  cross, 
but  because  they  despise  it."  And  Julian,  per- 
suaded by  this  affirmation,  again  descends  with 
him  into  the  cavern.  Legends  absurd  but  sympto- 
matic, because  they  reveal  the  bent  of  popular 
imagination,  and  at  the  same  time  the  credulity 
and  cunning  of  the  Christian  controversialists,  who 
transformed  the  Utopian  Hellenist,  devoted  to 
naught  but  Homer  and  Plato,  into  a  demoniacal 
figure,  destined  to  inspire  with  a  nameless  terror 
the  timorous  Christians  of  the  lower  classes. 

Gregory's  greatest  effort  is  to  make  Julian 
appear  as  a  ferocious  persecutor.  The  defenders 
of  Christianity  were  especially  irritated  by  the 
moderation  and  tolerance  with  which  Julian 
imagined  he  could  lead  the  world  back  to  ancient 
Hellenism.  To  these  apologists  it  seemed  impos- 
sible to  oppose  Christianity  except  by  violence, 
and  they  saw  in  this  attempt  an  infamy  and  a 
serious  peril.  And  thus  the  real  aim  of  Gregory's 
discourses  is  to  demonstrate  that,  in  spite  of 
appearances,  Julian  had  persecuted  the  Chris- 
tians. And  in  this  demonstration  Gregory 
proves  himself  a  disputant  of  singular  ability. 
He  employs,  with  great  efficacy,  the  weapons  of 
sarcasm  and  irony,  and  often  arrives  at  the  truth. 
That  Julian's  clemency  was  undoubtedly  tainted 
with  hypocrisy  is  very  natural.  We  may  also 
affirm,  without  doing  the  Emperor  injustice,  that 
the   tolerance  of  which   he   so  often   boasts  in 


492 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


his  letters  was  not  so  much  due  to  an  impartial 
judgment  and  a  true  respect  for  the  opinions  of 
others,  as  to  the  conviction  that  tolerance  was  a 
surer  means  than  persecution  to  attain  the  aim 
so  dear  to  his  heart.    But  Gregory  does  not,  in 
the  slightest,  appreciate  the  advantage  that  accrued 
to  the  Christians  from  the  attitude  of  the  pagan 
Emperor.    ''Julian" — he  says — "arranged  things 
in  such  a  way  that  he  persecuted,  without  appearing 
to  do  so,  and  we  suffered  without  receiving  the 
honour  that  would  have  been  due  to  us,  if  we  had 
been  seen  to  suffer  for  the  sake  of  Christ."  ^  The 
difference  between  Julian  and  the  other  emperors 
who  were  persecutors,  is,  that  the  latter  persecuted 
openly,  and  in  a  spirit  manifestly  tyrannical,  so  that 
they  gloried  in  the  violence  they  exercised.  Julian, 
instead,  in  his  persecutions   is  miserably  astute 
and  despicable.^    ''  Julian  " — affirms  Gregory,  with 
an  acuteness  which,  though  poisoned  with  hate, 
at   least   partially  succeeds   in   reproducing  the 
truth — ''divided  his  power  into  two  parts,  that  of 
persuasion  and  that  of  violence.    This  last,  being 
the  most  inhuman,  he  left  to  the  rabble  of  the 
cities,  whose  audacity  is  without  bounds,  because 
unreasonable  and  most  fierce  in  its  violence.  And 
this  without  public  decrees,  but  simply  by  not 
preventing  the  riots.     The  office,  more  benign 
and  more  worthy  of  a  prince,  that  of  persuasion, 
he  kept  for  himself.    But  he  did  not  succeed  in 

1  Gregor.,  op.  cit.,  72.  ^  /^/^.^  op.  cit.,  73. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  493 


maintaining  this  to  the  end,  since  it  is  against 
the  laws  of  nature,  for  the  same  reason  that  it  is 
impossible  for  the  leopard  to  change  its  spots, 
or  the  Ethiopian  his  dusky  skin.  ...  So  he  was 
everything  but  merciful  towards  the  Christians : 
even  his  humanity  was  inhuman,^  his  exhortations, 
violence ;  his  courtesy,  an  excuse  for  cruelty, 
because  he  wished  to  appear  to  have  the  right 
to  dCt  with  violence,  from  the  moment  that  it 
was  impossible  for  him  to  succeed  by  per- 
suasion." ^ 

In  these  words  of  Gregory  there  is  unquestion- 
ably a  foundation  of  truth,  cleverly  employed  by 
the  disputant,  who,  with  an  acute  opportunism, 
exaggerated  the  facts,  and  described  as  a  deliberate 
stratagem,  and  as  premeditated  actions,  that  which 
was  the  natural  outcome  of  the  situation.  Followinof 
the  thread  of  this  necessarily  hostile  interpretation, 
Gregory  reviews  nearly  all  those  actions  of  Julian 
with  which  we  are  already  acquainted,  and  for 
which  we  have  proved  that  the  Emperor  was  not 
directly  responsible,  or,  if  responsible,  that  he  was 
justified  by  provocation  ;  and  he  naturally  makes 
these  so  many  causes  of  accusation  against  his 
enemy.  All  this  is,  of  course,  artificial  and  partisan. 
But  this  is  not  the  case  with  the  admirable  invective 
in  which  the  orator  compares  the  positive  Christian 
virtues  with  the  fallacious  and  apparent  virtues  ^  of 

^  Gregor.,  op.  a'f.,  73.  Ka\  rjv  Xlav  aTrdvOpconov  dvTM  ro  (j)iXdvdpa)irov. 
2  Ih'd.y  Op.  cit.^  74.  3  c>p.  cit.,  76  sq. 


494 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


the  pagans,  and  breaks  out  in  a  paean  of  victory. 
Here  speaks  a  man  inflamed  with  zeal  and 
enthusiasm  for  the  truth  of  the  cause  he  is  defending. 
When  he  alludes  to  the  martyrs  and  their  glory, 
Gregory  finds  words  of  the  greatest  power.  But 
more  interesting  still  is  that  part  of  the  speech 
where  Gregory,  with  an  originality  of  thought  and 
intensity  of  feeling  no  longer  possessed  by  the 
exhausted  orators  of  Athens  and  Antioch,  announces 
the  essential  antitheses  of  Christianity,  which  are 
the  natural  effect  of  the  contrast  between  the 
pessimistic  conception  of  the  present  world  and  the 
optimistic  conception  of  the  future  one  ; — those 
antitheses,  by  which  the  true  Christian  glories 
in  his  earthly  sufferings  as  a  process  of  initiation 
into  the  felicity  of  heaven.  These  antitheses  had 
their  most  sublime  expression  in  the  divine  paradox 
of  the  beatitudes  of  the  Gospels.  Gregory  marvels 
that  Julian  did  not  yield  to  the  fascination  of  such 
a  profound  and  novel  doctrine,  and  attributes  the 
resistance  of  the  hardened  pagan  to  obstinacy, 
stupidity,  and  perfidious  designs.  Gregory  was 
mistaken.  He  should  rather  have  sought  the 
cause  of  Julian's  inexplicable  resistance  in  the  fact 
that  these  beautiful  antitheses  no  longer  represented 
the  true  conditions  of  Christianity,  by  means  of 
which,  at  that  time,  men  no  longer  hoped  to  arrive 
exclusively  at  a  future  celestial  felicity,  but  rather 
at  an  earthly  felicity,  and  besides,  that  it  presented 
a  deplorable  display  of  discord  and  covetousness. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  495 


Certainly,  it  was  the  moral  conception,  culminating 
in  the  apotheosis  of  the  humble  and  the  unfortunate, 
that  gave  to  Christianity  its  strength  and  its  victory. 
But,  in  the  fourth  century,  this  conception  had 
become  a  simple  rhetorical  expression,  to  which  the 
reality  in  no  way  responded.  It  was,  therefore, 
natural  that  a  soul  educated  in  the  worship  of 
ancient  wisdom  and  virtue  should  fmd  these  most 
luminous  in  comparison  with  the  others,  and  that 
it  should  see  in  a  return  to  the  ancient  faith  the 
salvation  of  the  world. 

The  Christian  disputant  is  certainly  in  the  right 
when  he  says  that  it  was  not  the  act  of  a  wise 
politician  to  attempt  to  lead  the  world  back  to 
polytheism,  because  at  that  time  the  Christian 
movement  was  already  too  widely  diffused,  and 
there  was  no  possibility  of  arresting  it.  Constantine's 
successors  could  do  nothing  but  follow  its  direction. 
A  return,  even  in  a  more  moderate  form,  to  the 
policy  of  Diocletian  would  have  still  more  weakened 
the  empire,  by  rendering  the  majority  of  the 
citizens  inimical  to  it.  Gregory,  however,  exagger- 
ates when  he  speaks  of  the  opposition  encountered 
by  Julian  in  his  attempt.  As  we  have  already  seen, 
the  rural  districts  had  remained,  for  the  most  part, 
faithful  to  paganism,  and  continued  so  for  a  long 
time  ;  for  full  thirty  years  after  the  death  of  Julian, 
Libanius,  in  his  great  discourse,  "About  the 
Temples,"  could  appeal  to  the  Emperor  Theodosius, 
supplicating  him  to  protect  the  rural  temples  from 


496  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


the  destructive  fury  of  the  Christians.^  The  army 
ever  remained  wholly  and  securely  in  the  hands  of 
Julian,  although  Gregory  affirms  that  he  abolished 
the  standard  that  bore  the  sign  of  the  cross.^  It 
is  true  that  Gregory  relates  a  great  scandal  that 
took  place  in  the  camp.  According  to  him,  the 
Christian  soldiers  presented  themselves  before  the 
Emperor,  and  asked  to  be  allowed  to  return  the 
gifts  they  had  received  from  him  on  the  occasion 
of  his  anniversary,  because  they  found  that  by 
burning  a  grain  of  incense  at  the  moment  of 
receiving  the  gifts,  they  had  committed  an  act  of 
pagan  worship.  Julian  only  punished  the  rebels 
with  exile,  not  wishing,  says  Gregory,  to  make 
real  martyrs  of  those  who  were  already  such  in 
intention.^  But,  in  this  account,  Gregory  has 
certainly  magnified  some  isolated  episodes  into 
proportions  of  a  solemn  scene,  because  the  truth  is 
that,  in  Julian's  army,  there  was  never  the  slightest 
tendency  to  breach  of  discipline.  If  there  is  one 
trait  above  all  others  that  proves  the  extent  of  the 
power  of  attraction  possessed  by  the  young  Emperor, 
it  is  the  ardent  and  boundless  devotion  that  his 
soldiers  had  for  him.  During  the  arduous  and 
exhausting  campaigns  of  Gaul  and  Germany,  in 
the  darinor  and  hazardous  adventures  of  his  rebellion 
against  Constantius,  in  his  grand  and  desperate 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  \\.  164,  5  sq.  -  Gregor.,  op.  ctf.,  75. 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  85.  Iva  fit]  fxdprvpas  epyaaerai  tovs  oaov  to  en' 
dvTois  fidprvpas. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  497 


campaign  against  Persia,  the  soldiers  followed  him 
with  enthusiasm  and  unswerving  fidelity.  But  it 
has  never  been  said  that  the  Christian  soldiers, 
although  there  must  have  been  many  of  them 
in  the  army,  ever  hesitated  to  obey  orders.  If 
even  the  suspicions  of  Libanius  and  Sozomenes 
were  true,  that  Julian  was  killed  by  a  javelin  hurled 
by  the  hand  of  a  Christian,  the  mystery  in  which 
the  matter  was  shrouded  and  the  secrecy  of  the 
plot  are  the  strongest  proof  that  no  plans  of  rebellion 
could  have  had  the  slightest  possibility  of  success 
among  Julian's  devoted  troops. 

One  of  the  acts  of  persecution  attributed  to  the 
Emperor  by  Gregory  was  the  famous  School  Law. 
But  we  have  elsewhere  gauged  the  value  of  his 
judgment  on  this  score.  Let  us  rather  stop  for  a 
moment  to  consider  the  manner  in  which  he  attacks 
Julian,  because  he  imitated  in  the  institutions  of  his 
reformed  polytheism  the  institutions  of  Christianity. 
Gregory  is  forced  to  recognise  the  humanity  of 
Julian's  initiative,  but  he  refuses  to  admit  the 
honesty  of  his  intentions.  Julian,  says  Gregory, 
desired  to  imitate  that  Assyrian  general  who,  being 
unsuccessful  in  his  attempt  to  take  Jerusalem, 
attempted  to  treat  with  the  Hebrews,  sweetly 
speaking  Hebrew,  in  order  to  seduce  them  by  the 
harmony  of  his  words.  So  Julian  founded  schools, 
hospitals,  and  even  monasteries,  and  wished  to 
establish  a  priestly  hierarchy  similar  to  that  of  the 
Christians,  and  exhorted  them  to  exercise  charity 

VOL.  II. — 12 


498  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


towards  the  poor.  I  do  not  know,"  Gregory 
acutely  remarks,  '*if  it  was  a  good  thing  for 
Christianity  that  Julian's  attempt  to  Christianise 
paganism  was  cut  short  at  its  birth,  by  the  death 
of  the  Emperor,  because  if  it  had  continued  it 
would  have  revealed  his  ape-like  tendencies.  The 
apes,  in  trying  to  imitate  men,  let  themselves  be 
caught,  and  such  would  also  have  been  his  fate, 
for  he  would  have  become  entangled  in  his  own 
nets,  since  Christian  virtues  are  an  intrinsic  part  of 
the  nature  of  Christianity,  and  not  such  as  can  be 
imitated  by  any  of  those  who  wish  to  follow  after 
us,  they  being  triumphant,  not  through  human 
wisdom,  but  by  divine  power,  and  by  the  consist- 
ency that  comes  with  time."^ 

The  whole  of  Gregory's  first  discourse  is  an 
attempt  to  prove  that  Julian  was  a  persecutor.  As 
this  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  points  in  the 
personality  of  this  enigmatical  Emperor,  we  will 
examine  it  once  again. 

That  Julian  ever  abandoned  this  principle  of 
moderation,  that  rule  of  conduct  which  prevented 
him  from  having  recourse  to  violence  in  order  to 
obtain  the  triumph  of  his  cause,  no  impartial  writer 
has  ever  been  able  to  affirm.  The  most  strenuous 
efforts  will  never  succeed  in  transforming  the  Neo- 
Platonic  dreamer  into  a  persecuting  sovereign.  For 
all  that,  a  thesis  sustained  by  that  acute  critic.  Rode, 
and  recently  revived  by  the  writer  (Allard)  who 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  102  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  499 


has  published  the  latest  study  on  Julian,  attempts 
to  prove  that,  in  Julian's  actions,  there  was  a  ten- 
dency to  a  sort  of  evolution,  so  that  although  he 
began  under  the  inspiration  of  great  moderation 
and  equanimity  of  mind,  he  would,  little  by  little, 
have  become  so  exasperated  that  he  would  finally 
have  arrived  at  the  point  of  committing  acts  of 
severity  which,  although  not  exactly  proceedings  of 
persecution,  were  very  near  akin  to  them. 

It  appears  to  us  that  this  thesis  is  absolutely 
artificial,  and  responds  to  a  preconceived  idea. 
First  of  all,  Julian  s  reign  was  so  short  as  to  pre- 
clude a  fundamental  evolution  of  his  mind,  and, 
besides,  his  actions  cannot  possibly  be  arranged  in 
that  chronological  order  which  would  have  been 
necessary  in  order  to  deduce  the  conclusion  that 
Julian  was  rapidly  inclining  towards  persecution. 
Thus,  one  of  the  acts  of  the  Emperor — an  error, 
according  to  our  opinion,  but  which  only  a  partisan 
writer  like  Gregory  could  colour  with  a  sinister 
light  so  as  to  make  it  appear  a  religious  persecution 
— i.e.,  the  condemnation  of  the  courtiers  of  Con- 
stantius,  took  place  quite  at  the  beginning  of  his 
reign,  while  his  edict  of  disapproval  of  the  Alex- 
andrians for  the  murder  of  their  Bishop  George 
was  written  from  Antioch.  As  to  the  riots,  there 
were  many  during  his  short  reign,  now  Christians 
against  pagans,  and  again  the  latter  against  the 
former.  But  it  is  impossible  to  say  that  he 
fomented  these  insurrections  in  order  to  repress  the 


500 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Christians  with  the  greatest  severity.  We  have 
seen,  on  the  contrary,  that,  even  in  grave  cases, 
he  contented  himself  with  inflicting  punishments 
of  a  purely  administrative  order. 

We  must,  on  the  other  hand,  recognise  that  it 
would  have  been  impossible  for  Julian  to  have 
renewed  the  classic  persecution  of  the  preceding 
emperors.  As  we  have  already  said,  it  is  now 
proved  that  the  persecutions  of  the  Christians 
happened  by  cocercitio,  that  is  to  say,  through 
proceedings  de  simple  policed  The  Romans  did 
not,  in  the  slightest  degree,  concern  themselves 
with  the  doctrines  of  the  Christians,  because  dog- 
matic persecution  was  absolutely  unknown  to 
them,  and  they  did  not  even  inquire  into  the  crimes 
of  which  the  Christians  were  imagined  to  be  guilty. 
The  Christians  were  considered  as  forming  a  sect 
dangerous  to  the  State,  therefore  on  certain 
occasions  the  Imperial  authorities  ordered  what 
nowadays  is  called  a  "raid,"  and  if  the  arrested 
refused  to  perform  the  required  act  of  adoration 
before  the  image  of  the  Emperor,  they  were  con- 
demned to  suffer  capital  punishment.  But  these 
police  proceedings  are  only  possible  against  a 
slender  minority.  The  day  in  which  the  minority 
becomes  in  its  turn  the  majority,  they  rebel,  and 
employ  against  their  ancient  adversaries  those 
systems  of  persecution  of  which  they  were  for  such 
a  long  time  the  victims.  And  this  is  exactly  the 
way  in  which  the  Christians  acted  from  the  moment 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  501 


that  Constantine  had  given  Christianity  a  legal  and 
recognised  status. 

Julian,  therefore,  even  if  he  had  wished,  could 
not  have  persecuted  the  Christians  by  means  of  the 
ancient  systems.    And  he  never  attempted  to  do 
so.     But  it  is  useless  to  ask  from  Julian  more 
than  he  could  give.    Julian  could  not  become  a 
protector  of  Christianity.    He  wished  to  oppose  it, 
attempted  to  stop  its  diffusion,  and  desired  to  put 
in  its  place  Hellenic  polytheism.    This  was  his 
programme,  and  we  cannot  expect  that  his  actions 
should  have  been    in   contradiction  to  it.  He 
could  neither  favour  the  Christians  nor  leave  them 
in  possession  of  the  privileges  and  prerogatives 
that  they  had  managed  to  acquire  during  the  half- 
century  of  their  dominion.    The  Christians,  as  we 
have  seen  in  Sozomenes  and  Socrates,  protested 
against  this  return  to  antiquity.    Considering  the 
question  from  their  point  of  view,  they  were  right ; 
but  Julian's  conduct  because  of  this  was  neither 
that  of  a  persecutor  nor  even  condemnable.    It  is 
with  such  criteria  that  the  administrative  rigour  of 
Julian,  of  which  we  have  already  spoken,  must  be 
judged.    The   truth    is,    Julian   had   simply  re- 
established the  ancient  modes  of  government,  and 
equality  between  all  citizens — a  course  of  action 
that  was  necessary  to  accomplish  his  programme. 
In  the  administration  of  justice,  he  was  so  impartial 
that  it  was  said  that  Justice,  which  had  taken  refuge 
in  heaven,  returned,  while  he  was  Emperor,  to 


502 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


earth.  And  the  good  Ammianus  explicitly  tells  us 
that  ''although  Julian  sometimes  indulged  in  in- 
opportune questions  regarding  the  religion  of  each 
of  the  litigants,  none  of  his  statements  of  cases 
were  found  to  be  contrary  to  the  truth,  nor  could 
he  ever  be  upbraided  with  the  reproof  of  having 
deviated,  either  on  account  of  religious  questions  or 
of  any  other  considerations,  from  the  narrow  path  of 
equity — nec  argui  unquam  potiiit  ob  religionevi, 
vel  qtwdaimque  aliud  ab  csquitatis  recto  tramite 
deviasseT^  This  explicit  declaration  from  the 
impartial  historian,  who  never  concealed  the  faults 
and  blemishes  of  his  hero,  and  who,  furthermore,  is 
quite  impervious  to  all  religious  fanaticism,  decides 
the  question  in  the  most  unmistakable  manner. 
Julian,  except  in  the  case  of  his  personal  antagonism 
to  Athanasius,  never  assumed  the  part  of  a  per- 
secutor. All  the  acts  that  his  enemies  and  the 
ecclesiastical  writers,  Gregory,  Socrates,  Sozomenes, 
Rufinus,  point  out  as  proofs  of  persecution,  are 
only  measures  intended  to  deprive  the  Christian 
Church,  without  violence,  of  the  privileges  which  it 
had  arrogated  to  itself.  Now,  the  idea  of  giving  to 
these  actions  the  logical  sequence  of  the  aim  which 
Julian  wished  to  attain,  the  appearance  of  a  per- 
secution, by  which  Christianity  could  be  forcibly 
eradicated  and  replaced  by  paganism,  has  to 
us  the  effect  of  a  most  partial  judgment — a 
judgment   totally  lacking  in  objectivity,  seeking 

1  Amm.  MarcelL,  op.  cit.^  i.  288. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


503 


a  fault  with  the  pre-estabHshed  intention  of 
finding  it. 

The  second  of  Gregory's  two  virulent  dis- 
courses is  a  cry  of  joy  for  Julian's  catastrophe. 
The  terrible  orator  heaps  on  the  head  of  the 
fallen  all  the  insults  suggested  to  him  by  his 
fertile  imagination,  and  those  which  he  culls  from 
the  inexhaustible  store  of  Biblical  literature.  In 
order  to  express  the  magnitude  of  Julian's  wicked- 
ness, he  must  be  called  at  the  same  time  Jeroboam, 
Ahab,  Pharaoh,  Nebuchadnezzar.  No  nature 
was  more  ready  than  his  in  discovering  and 
devising  evil.^  And  this  is  proved  by  the  favours 
which  he  liberally  bestowed  on  the  Jews,  and  the 
promise  that  he  made  to  them  of  rebuilding  the 
Temple  of  Jerusalem — a  promise  rendered  vain  by 
the  miraculous  interposition  of  God.  The  narra- 
tion he  gives  of  the  campaign  against  the  Persians 
is  most  exasperating,  because  of  the  unjust  and 
partisan  spirit  with  which  it  is  written.  All  the 
admirable  preparations  and  the  extraordinary 
ability  by  means  of  which  the  Emperor  triumphantly 
led  his  army  as  far  as  Ctesiphon,  are  persistently 
denied  by  Gregory,  who  attributes  this  success  to  a 
stratagem  of  the  Persians — a  stratagem  designed  to 
lure  the  enemy  to  the  interior  of  the  country,  where 
they  could  more  easily  be  defeated  ;  he  is  perfectly 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.,  III.  dv  yap  eyevero  nopiixwrcpa  (pvais  €<eivj]s  els 
t:a<ov  evpeaLV  Ka\  errivoiav. 


504 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


silent  concerning  Julian's  heroism,  and  he  depicts 
him  as  a  raging  lunatic.  As  to  Julian's  death, 
Gregory  does  not  know  to  whom  to  attribute  the 
merit  of  the  killing.  He  makes  no  allusion  to  the 
possibility  of  its  having  been  the  work  of  a 
Christian.  But  he  glories  in  the  death  of  the 
Emperor,  as  if  it  were  the  salvation  of  the  world, 
and  he  relates  that  Julian  had  given  orders  that 
his  body  should  be  secretly  thrown  into  a  river,  so 
that  it  might  be  believed  that  he  had  disappeared 
and  ascended  to  heaven,  and  was  numbered 
among  the  gods !  How  greatly  does  party 
prejudice  obscure  the  judgment  and  travesty  truth ! 
Behold  the  transformation  wrought  in  the  affecting 
and  sublime  scene  described  by  Ammianus  and 
Libanius  by  the  hand  of  an  enemy !  But  if  critical 
sentiment  rises  in  arms  against  this  tempest  of 
unmerited,  or  at  least  excessive,  abuse,  and  against 
this  intentional  caricature  of  the  historical  person- 
ality, still,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  impossible  to 
resist  the  overpowering  eloquence  of  the  triumphant 
orator.  The  peroration  of  Gregory's  discourse  is 
like  the  clang  of  a   clarion  saluting  a  victory. 

Give  me" — he  cries — **give  me  thy  Imperial  and 
sophistical  discourses,  thy  irresistible  syllogisms, 
thy  meditations.  We  will  compare  them  with  that 
which  untutored  fishermen  have  said  to  us.  But 
my  prophet  commands  me  to  silence  the  echo  of 
thy  songs,  the  sound  of  thine  instruments !  .  .  . 
Divest  thyself,  O  hierophant,  of  thine  infamous 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  505 


stole !    O  priests,   robe   yourselves  with  justice, 
the  glorious  stole,  the  immaculate  tunic  of  Christ ! 
Let  thy  message  of  dishonour  be  silenced,  and  let 
the  message  of  divine   truth   resound !  Closed 
must  be  thy  books  of  falsehood  and  magic,  let  us 
open  the  books  of  the  prophets  and  of  the  apostles  ! 
.  .  .  What  benefit  did  accrue  to  thee  from  the 
great  armaments  thou   didst   prepare,  from  the 
numberless  war-machines  that  were  invented,  from 
the  many  myriads  of  men,  the  numerous  battalions  ? 
Much  stronger  were  our  prayers  and  the  will  of 
God ! "  ^    Gregory  exults  in  the  idea  of  all  the 
torments  of  the  Hellenic  Tartarus  and  of  others 
still  worse,  applied  to  Julian,  and  then  exclaims  : 
These  things  we  tell  thee,  we  to  whom  thy  great 
and  admirable  law  would  have  forbidden  the  rio^ht 
to  speak.    Thou  seest,  that  though  condemned  by 
thy  decrees,  we  do  not  remain  silent,  but  raise 
freely  on  high  our  voice  which  curses  thy  folly ! 
No  one  dare  attempt  to  stem  the  cataracts  of  the 
Nile  falling  from  Ethiopia  into  Egypt,  nor  stop 
the  rays  of  the  sun,  even  if,  for  a  moment,  they  are 
obscured  by  passing  clouds,  nor  to  silence  the 
tongues  of  the   Christians   publicly  reviling  thy 
conduct !    This  Basil  and  Gregory  say  unto  thee, 
the  enemies  and  opposers  of  thine  attempt,  whom 
thou,  knowing  to  be  renowned  and  famous  in  the 
whole  of  Greece,  for  their  life,  their  doctrine,  and 
their  union,  thou  didst  reserve  for  the  final  battle, 

^  Gregor.,  op.  cit.^  126. 


506 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


as  a  splendid  and  triumphal  offering  to  the  demons, 
had  we  been  obliged  to  receive  thee  on  thy  return 
from  Persia,  and  perhaps  thou  didst  hope,  in  thy 
perverse  thoughts,  to  drag  us,  together  with  thee, 
to  Hades.  .  .  . 

I  dedicate  to  thee  " — thus  Gregory  closes  his 
tremendous  invective — "  this  column,  more  lofty 
and  splendid  than  the  Columns  of  Hercules.  The 
latter  remained  fixed  in  one  spot,  visible  only  to 
those  who  visit  them.  This  one,  being  movable, 
may  be  seen  by  every  one  and  from  everywhere. 
It  will  be,  believe  me,  transmitted  even  to  posterity, 
branding  thee  and  thy  enterprise,  and  will  be  a 
warning  to  others,  never  to  attempt  so  great  a 
rebellion  against  God,  because  the  same  crime 
would  meet  with  the  same  punishment ! "  ^ 

Before  such  diverse,  or  rather,  contradictory 
statements  regarding  Julian's  personality  presented 
to  us  by  contemporary  writers,  for  some  of  whom 
he  is  a  sort  of  demi-god  endowed  with  every  virtue, 
while  for  others  he  is  naught  else  but  a  vile  and 
unclean  monster,  it  would  be  a  hopeless  task  to 
discover  the  truth,  if  we  did  not  possess  the 
writings  of  Julian  himself,  from  which  it  is  not 
difficult  to  form  an  exact  idea  of  the  character  and 
talents  of  the  man.  We  have  already  examined  a 
great  part  of  these  writings  in  the  course  of  our 
study,  and  we  have  found  in  them  the  necessary 

^  Gregor.,  op.  czt.,  132  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


507 


indications  to  appreciate  his  mode  of  considering 
philosophical  and  religious  problems,  and  to  ex- 
plain his  conduct  in  the  complex  conditions  by 
which  he  found  himself  surrounded.  But  now  we 
must  try  to  penetrate  into  the  soul  of  the  man,  and 
see  him  as  he  really  is.  For  this  purpose,  we 
cannot  look  for  assistance  from  the  two  tiresome 
declamations  composed  by  Julian  in  honour  of 
Constantius,  when  he  had  re-entered  into  the  good 
graces  of  his  cousin.  These  are  two  compositions 
written  under  the  pressure  of  political  prudence,  by 
no  means  the  echo  of  his  convictions,  and,  there- 
fore, only  readable  as  the  proof  of  the  de- 
cadence into  which  Greek  letters  had  fallen  in 
the  schools  of  the  rhetoricians,  where  the  art  of 
writing  was  reduced  to  the  application  of  deter- 
mined formulas,  and  to  an  exercise  of  artificial 
imitations  of  examples  taken  from  ancient  history 
and  literature. 

But  we  must  admit,  for  the  sake  of  truth,  that 
these  discourses  reflect  anything  but  honour  upon 
Julian.  It  is  easy  to  understand  the  reasons  of 
opportunism  that  may  have  suggested  to  the  new 
Caesar  the  idea  of  composing  these  eulogies. 
Raised  suddenly  to  the  pinnacle  of  power,  invested 
with  an  authority  that  rendered  him  almost  a 
colleague  of  the  Emperor,  sustained,  as  he  knew  he 
was,  by  the  vigilant  and  powerful  influence  of 
Eusebia,  he  could  easily  imagine  that  a  new  era 
had  opened  for  him.    Because  of  all  this,  he  did 


508  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


not  wish  to  compromise  either  his  present  or  his 
future,  and  was  obHged  to  curry  favour  with  the 
suspicious  and  vain-glorious  Constantius,  by  dedi- 
cating to  him  the  first-fruits  of  his  intellect  and  his 
studies.  But,  admitting  all  this,  and  attributing  a 
great  part  to  the  emphatic  and  scholastic  formulary 
of  the  rhetorical  school  to  which  he  belonged,  we 
find  in  these  eulogies  such  an  excessive  adulation 
that  it  produces  a  painful  effect,  above  all  when  we 
recall  that  which  Julian  himself  related  a  few  years 
later  to  the  Athenians,  i.e.,  that  he  was  immediately 
impressed  by  the  duplicity  of  Constantius,  even 
when  he  assigned  to  him  the  name  and  the  power 
of  Caesar,  because  he  found  himself  surrounded  by 
spies,  looked  upon  with  suspicion  by  his  generals, 
and  considered  by  them  almost  in  the  light  of  a 
prisoner.^ 

We  must  needs  attribute  to  Julian  an  extra- 
ordinary power  of  dissimulation,  if  he  was  able, 
notwithstanding  the  most  precarious  circumstances 
by  which  he  was  surrounded,  to  send  these  hymns 
of  admiration  and  gratitude  to  his  wicked  cousin, 
the  murderer  of  all  his  family !  It  is  with  a  positive 
feeling  of  relief  that,  on  arriving  at  the  end  of 
these  declamations,  we  hear  the  author  excusing 
himself  from  giving  proofs  of  the  virtues  with  which 
he  has  decorated  the  personality  of  Constantius,  on 
the  plea  that  this  would  take  too  long,  and  that 
he  has  no  time  to  devote  to  the  Muses,  as  the 

1  Julian.,  op.  cif.,  277  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  509 


necessities  of  the  moment  call  him  to  action/  and 
this  action  was  possibly  the  great  campaign  against 
the  German  coalition  headed  by  Conodomarius — 
the  campaign  that  was  closed  by  the  glorious 
battle  of  Strasburg. 

The  Essay  of  Professor  R.  D'Alfonso,  on 
the  writings  of  Julian,  with  which  we  only  became 
acquainted  after  publishing  the  first  edition  of  this 
book,  is,  for  the  trustworthiness  of  its  information 
and  the  impartiality  of  its  judgment,  an  excellent 
contribution  to  the  studies  concerning  Julian. 
Professor  D'Alfonso  sustains  a  thesis  that  to  us 
appears  rather  bold,  namely,  that  Julian's  panegyrics 
on  Constantius  were  written  with  an  ironical  in- 
tention, so  that,  instead  of  being  the  expressions  of 
a  deplorable  opportunism,  they  were  effectively 
bitter,  but  veiled,  attacks  against  his  new  but  ever 
perfidious  protector.  Now^  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  Julian,  in  his  most  secret  thoughts,  did  not 
take  seriously  the  fulsome  flattery  he  lavished 
upon  his  cousin.  But  this  is  not  sufficient  to  give 
his  discourse  the  characteristics  of  irony.  For 
this  it  would  be  necessary,  if  he  had  some  reason 
to  reveal  his  true  thoughts,  for  him  to  have  written 
in  such  a  manner  that  his  hearers  and  readers 
might  be  able  to  guess  them,  although  hidden  by 
words  conveying  a  contrary  meaning.  Now,  these 
panegyrics  were  written  during  the  lune  de  miel 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  130.  e/xoi'  ov  (ryoki]  ras  novaas  cVi  toctovtov 
dfpaneveiv,  aXX'  (opa  Xolttov  npos  epyov  rpeneaOai. 


510 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  Julian's  reconciliation  with  Constantius  ;  the  first, 
probably,  during  his  sojourn  in  Milan,  the  second 
in  Gaul,  on  the  eve  of  one  of  his  first  campaigns. 
Julian  had  accepted  this  new  position,  that  made 
him  the  second  person  in  the  Empire.  This  being 
the  case,  it  was  only  reasonable  for  him  to  desire 
to  strengthen  his  claims  and  to  gain  as  much  as 
possible  the  favour  of  the  Emperor,  or  at  least  to 
dissipate  those  suspicions  which  yet  lingered  in 
his  soul.  What  folly  it  would  have  been  if,  in  the 
very  moment  in  which  he  received  from  Constantius 
the  office  of  Caesar  and  held  it  in  his  name,  he 
should  have  offended  him  by  the  thrusts  of  a  too 
transparent  irony !  The  two  panegyrics  were 
written  with  the  aim  of  eradicating  the  distrust 
that  the  consciousness  of  his  own  perverse  actions 
aroused  in  Constantius,  and  are  thus  in  part 
justifiable.  The  most  delicate  point  in  the  renewed 
relationship  between  the  two  cousins  must  have 
been  the  memory  of  the  murders  of  the  father  and 
relatives  of  Julian,  perpetrated  by  Constantius  at 
the  time  of  Constantine's  death.  Notwithstanding 
this,  in  his  first  discourse,  Julian  clearly  takes  his 
position,  and  repeats,  in  his  own  name,  those 
excuses  with  which  Constantius  attempted  to 
extenuate  his  crimes.  Julian  speaks  of  the  wise 
provisions  made  by  Constantius  when  he  assumed 
the  Empire,  and  then  adds  this  phrase :  "  But 
however,  forced  by  circumstances,  against  thy  will, 
thou  didst  not  prevent   others  from  committing 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  511 


excesses."^  As  we  have  shown  in  our  demonstra- 
tion, this  excuse  does  not  in  the  sHghtest  exculpate 
Constantius,  but,  at  any  rate,  it  gave  him  the  loop- 
hole by  which  he  might  escape  all  blame,  that  of 
throwing  the  responsibility  on  the  shoulders  of 
others.  This  explanation  was  officially  admitted, 
and  at  the  court  of  Constantius  was  accepted  with 
closed  eyes,  as  if  it  were  an  article  of  faith. 
Julian,  as  he  says  in  his  manifesto  to  the  Athenians, 
did  not  put  the  slightest  faith  in  it.  But  this 
does  not  change  the  fact  that  his  declaration, 
at  the  moment  in  which  he  made  it,  must 
have  been  considered  as  a  proof  and  a  guarantee 
that  he  had  forgotten  the  past,  that  he  had  resigned 
all  thoughts  of  vengeance,  and  all  sentiments  of 
horror  and  anger.  Having  taken  this  step,  which 
must  have  been  for  Julian  the  most  painful  and 
repugnant,  it  was  easy  work,  with  the  hypocritical 
recognition  of  the  virtues  of  Constantius,  to  enter 
on  the  7nare  magnum  of  the  rhetorical  adulation 
of  his  epoch,  and  to  fill  up  the  ordinary  lines  of 
official  panegyrics  with  that  stuff  (excepting,  perhaps, 
some  points  in  the  second  panegyric)  which  was 
to  be  found  ''ready-made  "  in  the  rhetorical  stores 
of  the  school. 

But  if  he  was  not  sincere,  he  at  least  wished 
to  appear  so,  and,  in  our  manner  of  seeing,  the 
idea  of  an  ironical  intention  in  his  discourses  ought 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  19.  77X7)1/  et  ttov  ^Laadds  vtto  tcou  Kaipcov  aiccov 
iripovs  €^a[xapTdveiv  ov  8ieKa>\vaas. 


512 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


to  be  excluded.  Until  after  the  battle  of  Strasburg, 
Julian  believed  he  would  be  able  to  live  on  good 
terms  with  Constantius.  And  on  his  side  he  tried, 
by  word  and  deed,  to  persuade  his  cousin  to 
have  faith  in  him  and  in  his  work.  Certainly,  in 
his  later  writings,  Julian  wishes  to  make  us  believe, 
that,  from  the  very  first  day  when  he  was  passing 
triumphantly  through  the  streets  of  Milan  in  the 
Imperial  coach,  he  had  a  presentiment  of  the  truth, 
and  the  certainty  of  being  betrayed  by  Constantius. 
But  we  must  not  blindly  accept  all  that  the  able 
disputant  says  in  his  own  defence.  And,  on  the 
other  hand,  we  must  allow  a  great  deal  for  the 
effects  of  historical  ''perspective,"  that  diminishes 
distances  and  gives  a  fore-shortened  view  to 
events  which,  in  reality,  happened  at  long  intervals. 
We,  therefore,  believe  that  the  only  conclusion 
is  that  these  panegyrics  were  written  by  Julian 
with  the  positive  intention  of  making  himself 
agreeable  to  Constantius,  and  that  they  are  a  true 
reflection  of  a  determined  moment  in  the  life  of 
our  hero. 

In  the  same  style,  and  on  the  same  line  of 
official  discourses,  is  the  panegyric  on  the  Empress 
Eusebia,  with  part  of  which  we  are  already 
familiar.  In  this,  however,  we  detect  an  accent 
of  undoubted  respect  and  an  expression  of  real 
gratitude,  and,  perhaps,  of  a  secret  tenderness  for  this 
noble  lady,  who  had  brought,  as  her  marriage  por- 
tion,   a  correct  education,  an  harmonic  intelligence, 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  513 


a  flower  and  breath  of  beauty  such  as  to  eclipse 
that  of  all  other  virgins,  as  the  rays  of  the  full 
moon  eclipse  and  obscure  the  light  of  the  stars."  ^ 
Concerning  this  panegyric  on  Eusebia,  we  shall 
speak  more  fully  later  on,  and  we  shall  attempt  to 
discover  the  nature  of  the  relationship  between  the 
young  prince  and  his  beautiful  and  powerful 
cousin. 

We  have  already  spoken  of  the  philosophical 
and  religious  discourses  which,  being  decidedly 
doctrinal  in  their  intent,  are,  therefore,  useless  in 
our  present  researches.  But,  in  the  other  writings 
that  have  reached  us,  Julian's  spontaneous  origin- 
ality, already  revealed  to  us  in  the  Misopogon, 
appears  in  its  untrammelled  brilliancy.  In  the 
Banquet  of  the  CcBsars,  in  the  Discourses  to 
Themistius  and  Sallustius,  and,  above  all,  in  his 
Epistles,  we  recognise  the  man  as  he  really  is,  the 
witty,  vivacious,  and  acute  writer,  who,  by  means 
of  a  genuine  inspiration,  succeeds  in  overcoming 
the  pedantic  and  scholastic  formalities  in  which 
he  had  been  reared. 

The  Banquet  of  the  CcEsars  is  a  satire  full  of 
wit  and  wisdom,  and  does  honour  to  Julian  as  a 
writer,  a  man,  and  an  emperor.  In  this  satire  he 
passes  in  review  all  his  predecessors,  exposing  their 
errors,  their  failings,  and  their  vices.  Among 
them  all,  one  alone  finds  grace  with  him,  and 
this  is  Marcus  Aurelius.     Most  admirable  indeed 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  109. 

VOL.  II. — 13 


514 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


this  young  man  of  thirty,  ruler  of  the  world,  who 
chooses  as  his  model  the  most  wise  among  all 
the  emperors.  All  his  other  judgments  are  in 
harmony  with  this  preference,  and  if  the  severity 
of  these  is  sometimes  excessive,  they  are  always 
inspired  by  a  high  sentiment  of  morality,  and 
expressed  with  extreme  elegance. 

Julian  at  the  feast  of  the  Saturnalia,  during 
which  it  was  a  duty  to  laugh  and  divert  oneself, 
not  being  able  to  do  either,  proposes  to  a  friend 
to  narrate  to  him  an  interesting  myth.  The 
friend  agrees,  and  Julian  begins.  Romulus,"  he 
tells  him,  in  order  to  celebrate  those  same  Satur- 
nalia, decided  to  invite  the  gods  and  the  emperors 
to  a  banquet  on  Olympus.  The  gods,  having 
accepted  the  invitation,  are  the  first  to  arrive, 
and  occupy  magnificent  thrones  in  the  prescribed 
order.  Silenus  is  next  to  Bacchus,  whom  he 
greatly  amuses  with  his  jokes  and  witticisms.  After 
the  gods  are  all  seated,  the  emperors  enter  one 
by  one,  and  Silenus  greets  each  of  them  with  a 
satirical  allusion.  Julius  Caesar  comes  first,  and 
Silenus  exclaims  :  '  Beware  of  this  man,  O  Jupiter, 
as,  on  account  of  his  love  of  power,  he  might 
attempt  to  rob  thee  of  thy  sovereignty.  Mark 
how  tall  and  handsome  he  is.  He  resembles  me, 
if  in  naught  else,  in  his  baldness ! '  After  him 
comes  Octavius,  who  changes  colour  like  a  chame- 
leon, now  yellow,  now  red,  now  black,  and  again 
grey.    Then  Tiberius,  full  of  sores  and  ulcers ; 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  515 


then  Caligula,  whom  the  gods  refuse  to  see,  and 
he  is  chased  away  and  hurled  back  into  Tartarus. 
Then  Silenus,  seeing  Claudius,  exclaims  :  '  Thou 
art  wrong,  O  Romulus,  to  invite  this,  thy  suc- 
cessor, without  his  freedmen  Narcissus  and  Pallas. 
Summon  them  here,  together  with  his  wife  Mes- 
salina,  for  without  them  he  is  only  a  ''super"  in 
the  tragedy.'  Here  comes  Nero,  with  the  lyre 
and  crowned  with  a  laurel  wreath.  And  Silenus 
turning  to  Apollo :  '  This  one  tries  to  imitate 
thee ! '  And  Apollo  replies  :  '  And  I  will  deprive 
this  vile  imitator  of  his  wreath ! '  And  Nero, 
bereft  of  his  wreath,  is  swallowed  by  Cocytus." 
Thus  they  all  pass  in  succession,  each  one  being 
accused  and  scoffed  at,  excepting  Nerva,  Marcus 
Aurelius,  —  whom  Silenus  chides  for  his  over- 
indulgence towards  his  wife  and  child,  —  the 
second  Claudius,  and  Probus,  who  has  no  other 
fault  but  his  excessive  severity.  Then  arrives  the 
quartette  of  Diocletian  and  his  three  associates 
— a  most  excellent  and  harmonious  combination, 
were  it  not  for  the  discordant  note  sounded  by 
Maximianus.  Finally,  to  this  harmony  succeeds 
a  strident  discord,  and  behold  Constantine  with 
his  rivals.  Constantine  alone  remains,  Licinius 
and  Magnentius  being  chased  away  by  the 
gods. 

The  banquet  being  thus  arranged.  Mercury 
proposes  to  open  a  competition  to  decide  which 
of  the  emperors   is  worthy  of  winning  a  prize 


516  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


awarded  by  the  gods.  This  proposal  is  well  re- 
ceived, especially  as  Romulus  has,  for  a  long 
time,  desired  to  be  permitted  to  have  some  one 
of  his  successors  near  him.  But  Hercules  insists 
that  Alexander  should  also  be  called,  and  this  is 
granted  him.  The  gods  decide  that  only  the 
most  noted  among  the  emperors  should  be  per- 
mitted to  compete,  and  they  choose  Alexander, 
Caesar,  Octavius,  Trajan,  Marcus  Aurelius,  and, 
finally,  on  the  recommendation  of  Bacchus,  also 
Constantine,  who  is,  however,  only  allowed  to  stand 
on  the  threshold  of  the  hall  of  the  gods.  Each 
one  of  the  six  rivals  is  called  on  to  make  a  speech, 
in  order  to  glorify  his  own  undertakings.  These 
speeches  are  written  by  our  poet  with  a  subtle 
acuteness.  Julius  Caesar  and  Alexander  vie  with 
each  other  as  to  which  is  due  the  greatest  glory. 
Caesar  endeavours  to  prove  that  his  enterprises 
were  much  more  difficult  and  heroic  than  those 
of  Alexander,  while  the  latter  tries  to  refute  the 
arguments  of  the  former,  by  calling  particular 
attention  to  the  fact  that  Caesar's  triumphs  were 
mainly  due  to  the  inexpertness  and  lack  of  talent 
of  his  adversary,  Pompey.  This  last-named  was 
certainly  not  one  of  Julian's  favourites.  Octavius 
pleads  his  wise  administration  of  the  Empire,  the 
ending  of  the  civil  war,  the  giving  to  the  Roman 
Empire  well-defined  boundaries,  the  Danube  and 
the  Euphrates,  and  healing  the  wounds  that  con- 
tinual wars  had  inflicted  on  the  State.    It  seems 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  517 


to  Octavius  that  he  has  governed  better  than  the 
two   warHke   emperors.      Trajan   reminds  them 
that,    besides   his    mihtary   enterprises,    he  can 
boast  of  the  kindness  with  which  he  treated  the 
citizens,  and  the  mildness  of  his  government,  so 
that,  by  his  words,  he  gains  the  sympathy  of  the 
gods.    After  him  comes  Marcus  Aurelius,  and  at 
once  Silenus  whispers  to  Bacchus  :     '  Let  us  listen 
to  this  Stoic !    Who  knows  how  many  paradoxes 
and  marvellous  maxims  he  will  reveal  to  us ! '  But 
Marcus  Aurelius,  looking  at  Jupiter  and  the  other 
gods,  says  :  'It  is  not  for  me,  O  Jupiter,  O  gods, 
to  make  discourses  and  take  part  in  competitions. 
If  you  were  ignorant  of  my  actions,  it  would  be 
advisable  that  I  should  acquaint  you  with  them. 
But  as  from  the  gods  nothing  is  hidden,  you  will,  of 
course,  give  me  the  prize  which  I  deserve.'  And 
Marcus  Aurelius  appeared   to  the  gods  as  one 
marvellously  wise,  for  he  knew  when  it  was  useful 
to  speak,  and  also  when  it  was  commendable  to 
remain  silent.  "  ^    Finally,  Constantine,  who  had 
remained  on  the  threshold  of  the  hall,  is  unwilling 
to  speak,  well  knowing  how  inferior  are  his  actions 
to  those   of  the   others.      But    feeling  obliged 
to  say  something,  he  awkwardly  attempts  to  prove 
that  he  is  superior  to  the  others  because  of  the 
character   of  the   enemies  with  whom   he  had 
fought,  for,  instead  of  waging  war  against  honest 
citizens,  as  Caesar  and  Octavius  had  done,  he  had 

^  Julian.,  op.  ci/.,  421,  19. 


518 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


overcome  perverse  tyrants.  "  *  Marcus  Aurelius,' 
he  foolishly  adds,  '  has  demonstrated  by  his  silence 
that  he  is  inferior  to  us  all.  And  Silenus  rejoins  : 
'  O  Constantine,  thou  dost  present  to  us  as  thy 
work  the  garden  of  Adonis.'  *  And  what  dost  thou 
mean  by  gardens  of  Adonis  ? '  '  They  are  those 
which  the  women,  in  honour  of  the  lover  of  Venus 
Aphrodite,  make  up  with  small  flower-pots,  in 
which  they  have  planted  sweet  herbs.  For  a  short 
while  they  are  green,  and  then  rapidly  fade  away.' 
And  Constantine  blushes,  well  understanding  the 
allusion  to  his  work."^ 

It  is  easy  to  perceive  that  Julian  entertained 
a  profound  antipathy  to  his  uncle,  and  sought  to 
diminish  his  fame.  This  antipathy  had  its  natural 
origin  in  the  privileged  position  bestowed  by  Con- 
stantine upon  Christianity.  But  it  must  seem 
strange  that  in  this  sort  of  examination  to  which 
the  emperors  are  submitted  by  the  gods,  no  other 
allusion  should  be  made  to  that  which,  in  their 
eyes,  must  have  been  Constantine's  greatest  crime. 
However,  perhaps  Julian  did  not  wish  to  attribute 
to  this  event,  which  for  him  was  nothing  more 
than  a  passing  episode,  a  greater  importance  than 
it  seemed  to  him  to  deserve  ;  and,  besides,  he  did 
not  wish  to  diminish  the  effect  of  the  parting  shot 
which,  as  we  shall  see  later,  he  discharges  at  the 
apostasy  of  Constantine. 

The  speeches  having  ended,  the  competition 

^  Julian.,  op.  df.,  423,  10  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  519 


should  have  been  closed,  but  the  gods  are  not 
yet  thoroughly  satisfied,  because,  in  order  to 
determine  the  merits  of  each  one,  it  is  not  sufficient 
to  be  acquainted  with  their  acts,  in  which  Fortune 
may  have  played  a  great  part ;  it  is  necessary 
also  to  scrutinise  the  intentions  that  have  influenced 
these  actions.  Hereupon  Mercury  begins  a  new 
interrogatory.  ''What  was  the  aim,"  he  says, 
addressing  himself  to  Alexander,  "  for  which  thou 
hast  worked  and  so  greatly  exerted  thyself  ? " 
"To  conquer  all,"  he  replies.  And  Silenus, 
with  a  lone  and  humorous  address,  induces 
Alexander  to  recognise  that  he  had  not  been 
able  to  conquer  himself.  "And  w^hat  has  been 
the  object  of  thy  life  ? "  demands  Mercury  of 
Caesar.  "To  be  the  first,  and  not  only  not  be, 
but  also  not  be  considered,  second  to  any  one." 
"Certainly,"  Silenus  remarks,  "thou  wert  the  most 
powerful  of  thy  fellow-citizens,  but  thou  didst  not 
succeed  in  making  thyself  loved  by  them,  notwith- 
standing thy  pretence  of  philanthropy  and  the 
adulations  you  showered  upon  them."  Augustus, 
who  says  that  his  aim  in  life  was  to  govern  wisely, 
and  Trajan,  who  admits  having  had  the  same 
aspirations  as  Alexander,  but  in  greater  modera- 
tion, are  both  subjected  to  the  taunts  of  Silenus. 
Marcus  Aurelius  alone,  by  the  simplicity  of  his 
answers,  vanquishes  the  sarcasms  of  that  satirical 
god.  "What  seems  to  thee,"  Mercury  asks 
Marcus  Aurelius,  "  the  noblest  aim  in  life  ?  "    "  To 


520  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


imitate  the  gods,"  he  repHes.  But  what  dost 
thou  mean,"  Silenus  inquires,  "by  imitating  the 
gods  ?  "  And  Marcus  AureHus — To  have  as  few 
wants  as  possible,  and  to  do  all  the  good  that 
is  in  thy  power  to  do."  And  then  Silenus  adds  : 
''And  thou,  therefore,  didst  not  need  anything  ?  " 
And  Marcus — I  myself  had  need  of  nothing, 
and  of  very  little  my  poor  miserable  body." 
Silenus,  having  exhausted  all  his  resources,  seeks 
to  embarrass  this  wise  emperor  by  accusing  him 
of  too  much  indulgence  towards  his  wife  and 
son.  But  Marcus  Aurelius  defends  his  actions  by 
quoting  Homer,  and  invoking  the  examples  of 
indulgence  given  by  Jupiter,  who  taught  that  we 
should  be  tolerant  with  wives,  and  who  once  said 
to  Mars,  I  would  strike  thee  with  my  thunderbolts 
if  thou  wert  not  my  son."  Then  comes  the  turn 
of  Constantine,  who  is  absolutely  annihilated  by 
the  jeers  of  Silenus  ;  and  the  gods  finish  by  voting 
in  a  majority  for  Marcus  Aurelius.  Then  Mercury, 
commissioned  by  Jupiter,  announces  to  the  rivals 
that,  through  divine  bounty,  all  of  them,  the  victor 
and  the  vanquished,  are  allowed  to  choose  each  a 
tutelar  god,  near  whom  they  can  live  in  safety. 
Alexander,  as  soon  as  he  hears  this,  places  himself 
near  Hercules ;  Octavius,  near  Apollo ;  Marcus 
Aurelius,  between  Jupiter  and  Saturn  ;  Caesar  is 
received  by  Mars  and  Venus  ;  Trajan  places  him- 
self near  Alexander.  And  now  we  come  to  the 
strange  finale^  which  it  is  necessary  to  reproduce 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  521 


in  Julian's  own  words.  Constantine,  not  finding 
among  the  gods  an  archetype  to  his  taste,  and 
perceiving  Incontinence  in  his  neighbourhood, 
runs  to  meet  her.  She  received  him  most  kindly, 
embraced  him,  arrayed  him  in  a  glittering  peplum, 
and  led  him  to  Dissoluteness,  near  whom  was 
Jesus,  who  cried :  '  Corrupters,  murderers,  exe- 
crable and  criminal  men,  come  unto  me  with- 
out fear !  By  washing  yourselves  with  these  few 
drops  of  water,  I  will  render  ye  clean  in  an  instant, 
and  if  ye  should  sin  again,  I  will  again  give  ye 
means  to  cleanse  yourselves  anew,  if  only  ye  will 
strike  your  heads  and  your  breasts.'  Constantine 
felt  most  happy  to  be  with  him,  and  together 
with  his  sons  left  the  assembly  of  the  gods.  But 
the  demons,  avengers  of  this  impiety,  tormented 
him  and  those  belonging  to  him,  and  made  them 
pay  dearly  for  the  blood  of  their  relations  which 
they  had  shed." 

At  the  close  of  the  scene,  Julian  presents  him- 
self as  the  last  of  the  emperors,  and  Mercury  says 
to  him  :  ''I  permit  thee  to  become  acquainted 
with  Father  Mithras.  Submit  thyself  to  his 
commands,  and  thou  wilt  find  a  wise  instruction 
and  a  safe  path  for  thy  life,  and  the  good  hope  of 
having  as  a  guide  a  merciful  deity  when  the 
moment  comes  for  thee  to  depart."^ 

This  is  indeed  a  most  shameful  mockery  and  a 
supremely  iniquitous  interpretation  of  the  inspiration 

^  Julian.,  oj^,  a'L,  431,  8  sq. 


522 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


of  Jesus.  But  here  we  must  observe  that  the  name 
"Jesus"  does  not  refer  to  the  personaHty  of  the 
Evangehcal  Christ,  but  to  a  personification  of  the 
Christian  reHgion  as  it  was  in  JuHan's  time,  and  as 
it  appeared  to  him.  Now,  the  truth  is,  as  we  have 
previously  pointed  out,  that  Christianity  had,  in  no 
respect,  moralised  the  customs  of  mankind.  In 
Julian's  text  this  appears  evident  from  the  fact  that 
it  was  possible  for  the  writer  to  accuse  Jesus  of 
having  been  the  demoraliser  of  the  world.  Chris- 
tianity had  taken  root  because  it  had  been  able  to 
satisfy  certain  aspirations  of  the  human  mind  at  the 
moment  in  which  it  appeared.  But  Christianity 
could  not  make  man  moral,  because  man  cannot  be 
moralised  by  means  of  a  doctrine  imparted  from 
without ;  he  is,  on  the  contrary,  only  made  better 
by  the  conditions  of  the  medium  in  which  he 
lives,  and  this  medium  is  the  direct  cause  of  that 
wholly  relative  conception,  morality.  Whether 
pagans  or  Christians,  men  were  equally  endowed 
with  a  certain  amount  of  good  and  evil  qualities, 
harmonising  with  the  character  of  existing  customs  : 
morals  do  not  create  customs,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
morals  are  the  outcome  of  prevailing  customs.  In 
the  early  days  of  Christianity,  when  it  was  most 
dangerous  to  become  a  Christian,  only  those  pro- 
fessed it  who  were  susceptible  of  exalted  convic- 
tions, and  were  capable  of  heroically  sacrificing 
themselves,  so  that  all  appear  to  us  as  saints.  But 
when  Christianity  was  recognised  as  a  religion,  at 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  523 


first  tolerated  and,  later  on,  dominant,  it  became,  like 
all  other  religions,  a  mere  cloak,  that  leaves  un- 
changed   the  man  whom   it  envelops.  Among 
Christians,  no  less  than  among  pagans,  there  were 
good  and  bad,  selfish  and  generous,  cruel  and 
merciful.    Ambrose  might  have  been  a  better  man 
than    Simmachus   and   Libanius,  who  remained 
pagans  ;  but  Julian,  as  a  pagan,  was  as  much  to  be 
admired  for  his  morals  as  Constantine  and  Con- 
stantius,  converts   to    Christianity,    were   to  be 
despised.     Now,  Constantine's   Court,  although 
Christian,  was  a  hotbed  in  which  every  rotten 
abomination  fermented.      Julian  recognised,  in  his 
uncle  and  his  cousin,  the  assassins  of  his  family, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  saw  them  exalted  by  the 
Christians  and  freed  from  all  stain,  by  the  simple 
effects  of  a  purely  formal  conversion.    From  this 
arose  his  feeling  of  abhorrence,  and,  considering 
the  special  conditions  in  which  he  lived,  one  must 
acknowledge  that  it  was  most  explicable.    Julian  s 
error — an  error  truly  common  to  most  men — was 
to  imagine   that   some  one  was  responsible  for 
the  inevitable,  and  thus,  with  sacrilegious  levity, 
he  attributed  to  the  Founder  of  Christianity  the 
responsibility  of  that  which  was  the  consequence  of 
human    nature,  in  a  determined  moment  of  its 
evolution.^ 

^  We  have  said  above  {^ide  vol.  i.  p.  145)  that  the  report  was  current 
among  the  pagans,  and  was  repeated  by  Zosimus,  that  Constantine 
had  inclined  to  Christianity  because  he  believed  that  this  religion 
had  the  power  of  washing  away  the  sins  committed  by  a  man.  And 


524 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


This  Dialogue  of  Julian,  like  all  his  other 
works,  only  lacks  the  arduiis  limes  labor  to  be  most 
excellent.  He  ogives  us  his  ideas  concernins:  the 
duties  of  a  sovereign.  And  so  lofty  are  these 
ideas,  that  he  has  naught  but  disapproval  for  the 
emperors  who  preceded  him,  with  the  one  excep- 
tion of  Marcus  Aurelius.  It  appears  that  even  the 
glory  gained  in  war  found  little  grace  in  his 
eyes,  and  did  not  constitute  a  merit  for  those  who 
had  attained  it.  Julian,  therefore,  should  have  been 
a  most  peace-loving  emperor,  entirely  devoted  to 
that  religious  propaganda  which  was  his  most  lively 
preoccupation.  But,  once  again,  nature  vanquished 
reason,  and  he  proved  that,  notwithstanding  his 
beautiful  theories,  he  resembled,  in  many  respects, 
that  Alexander  whom  he  did  not  spare  with  his  taunts 
through  the  medium  of  the  sarcastic  Silenus.  This 
crowned  Neo-Platonic  philosopher  was,  in  reality, 
above  all  a  warrior,  and  the  attractions  of  glory 
possessed  for  him  an  irresistible  fascination, 
although  he  was  unwilling  to  confess  it.  So  we  see 
that,  as  soon  as  he  reached  the  throne,  his  first 

Constantine,  more  than  any  other  man,  had  the  need  of  being  cleansed. 
We  also  added  that  this  report  could  only  have  had  a  legendary  origin. 
Constantine  perpetrated  his  most  atrocious  domestic  crimes,  i.e.^ 
the  murders  of  his  wife  Fausta,  of  his  son  Crispus,  of  his  infant 
grandchild  Licinianus,  many  years  after  the  promulgation  of  the  Edict 
of  Milan,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  so  little  did  he  crave  the  purifying 
waters,  that  he  only  asked  for  baptism  on  his  death-bed.  It  is 
impossible,  however,  not  to  recognise  in  Julian's  words  an  allusion  to 
this  report,  and  we  must  therefore  conclude  that,  among  the  pagans 
who  were  his  contemporaries,  this  was  the  current  explanation  of 
Constantine's  conversion. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  525 


thoueht  was  to  throw  himself  into  that  insane 
Persian  war,  which  was  only  undertaken  to  satisfy 
his  adventurous  spirit  and  to  astonish  the  world  by 
such  a  colossal  enterprise.  Libanius  especially 
alludes  to  his  great  anxiety  and  impatience,  and 
in  his  Necrological  Discourse  describes  the 
ardour  with  which  Julian  rushed  into  this  hazard- 
ous attempt.  He  with  difficulty  acquiesced  in  the 
short  delay  indispensable  to  drill  men  and  horses, 
all  the  while  shaking  with  suppressed  fear  lest 
some  one  should  mockingly  say  of  him  that  he 
was  of  the  same  family  as  the  cowardly  Constantius. 
The  King  of  Persia  sent  him  a  letter  proposing 
that  they  should  submit  the  differences  between 
Persia  and  the  Empire  to  a  Court  of  Arbitration. 
Every  one  implored  him  to  accept  this  proposi- 
tion. But  he,  throwing  the  letter  angrily  aside, 
declared  it  would  be  dishonourable  to  condescend 
to  a  discussion  with  the  destroyers  of  so  many 
cities,  and  he  replied  to  the  king  that  ambassadors 
were  unnecessary,  as,  in  a  short  time,  he  himself 
was  coming  to  visit  him.  Such  a  response  would 
probably  have  been  natural  to  many  of  those 
emperors  from  whom  Julian  withheld  his  approval, 
but  it  would  never  have  issued  from  the  lips  of  wise 
Marcus  Aurelius,  who,  in  making  war,  was  only 
guided  by  conscientious  motives,  as  in  all  other  acts 
pertaining  to  his  office,  and  who  fought  sadly  and 
passionlessly,  much  preferring  to  have  passed  his 
time  immersed  in  his  melancholy  meditations  !  But 


526 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


in  Julian,  philosophy  and  even  pedantry  are 
strangely  blended  with  youthful  ardour  and  a  strong 
longing  for  action,  and  this  makes  him  a  highly 
original  figure,  exceedingly  rich  in  striking  contrasts, 
and  one  of  the  most  interesting  in  all  history. 

The  long  study  we  have  already  made  of  the 
work  and  writings  of  Julian  has  given  us  a  clear 
insight  into  the  nature  of  his  personality — a  person- 
ality so  fascinating  and  paradoxical  that  it  cast  a 
brilliant  ray  of  light,  as  that  of  a  passing  meteor, 
upon  the  growing  darkness  in  which  ancient  civilisa- 
tion was  about  to  be  engulfed.  But  we  do  not  wish 
to  leave  him  until  we  have  sought  in  his  Epistles 
some  more  precise  indications  of  his  merits  and 
foibles.  Julian's  letters  are  among  the  most  inter- 
esting- documents  in  Greek  literature.  Unfortu- 
nately,  even  the  small  number  that  remain  are  in  a 
bad  state  of  preservation,  doubtful  as  to  the  text, 
and  often  disfigured  with  interpolations  and 
omissions,  so  that  for  these,  as  well  as  for  the  rest 
of  his  writings,  it  is  greatly  to  be  desired  that  the 
light  of  modern  criticism  should  be  directed  towards 
them,  in  order  that  an  edition  might  be  published, 
illustrating  them  in  all  their  bearings,  philological, 
literary,  and,  above  all,  historical.  Some  of  these 
letters  are  merely  rhetorical  exercises,  others  are 
edicts  and  manifestoes  to  cities  and  magistrates,  and 
with  these  we  are  already  acquainted.  Many  are 
short,  witty,  and  emotional  expressions  of  the  im- 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  527 


pressions  of  the  moment,  and  it  is  in  these  that  we 
find  most  genuinely  portrayed  the  soul  of  him  who 
composed  them. 

But  before  reading  some  of  Julian's  letters,  we 
must  glance  at  two  of  his  other  works,  which  are 
most  interesting,  and  possess  the  characteristics 
of  his  treatises  and  letters.  These  are  the 
Epistle  to  Themistius  and  the  Exhortation  to 
Sallustius. 

Themistius  was  one  of  the  most  celebrated  men 
of  his  times.  A  famous  writer  and  rhetorician,  he 
had  a  school  at  Constantinople,  and  enjoyed  the 
protection  of  all  the  emperors  from  Constantine  to 
Theodosius,  having  even  held  the  high  office  of 
Prefect  of  Constantinople.  Although  he  was  not 
a  member  of  the  Neo-Platonic  clique,  he  was  a 
most  fervent  Hellenist.  But  being  of  a  lofty  and 
generous  spirit,  he  recommended,  above  all,  liberty 
of  thought  and  religious  tolerance.  The  discourse 
delivered  by  him,  a  pagan,  before  the  Emperor 
Valens,  in  order  to  persuade  him  to  desist  from  his 
persecution  of  the  Orthodox  Christians,  has  remained 
famous.^  In  this  discourse,  Themistius  considers 
things  from  the  point  of  view  of  rational  theism, 
which  for  a  moment  inspired  Constantine  in  his 
Edict  of  Milan,  and  remains  wholly  indifferent  to 
the  forms  of  worship.  Themistius  must  have 
exercised  a  very  salutary  influence  on  the  soul 
of  Julian. 

1  Socrat.,  op.  cit.^  205, — Sozom.,  op.  cit..,  565. 


528 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


The  Epistle  to  Themistius  is  a  genuine  indica- 
tion of  the  character  of  the  young  Emperor  and 
of  the  tendencies  of  his  mind.  It  seems  that  no 
sooner  had  Julian  ascended  the  throne  than  he  wrote 
and  confided  to  him  his  anxieties,  the  difficulties 
that  beset  him,  and,  at  the  same  time,  his  regrets  at 
being  obliged  to  renounce  for  ever  his  peaceful  life 
and  studies.  Themistius  must  have  replied  to  him 
rather  harshly,  reminding  him  of  the  magnitude  of 
his  new  duties,  and  upbraiding  him  almost  as  if 
he  were  guilty  of  longing  for  idleness  and  peace. 
Julian  did  not  willingly  accept  the  reproof  of  his 
philosophic  friend,  and  addressed  to  him  the  follow- 
ing Epistle,  as  subtle  as  it  is  dignified,  one  of  his 
best  efforts,  and  a  living  testimony  to  his  honesty  and 
good  sense.  There  is  nothing  more  characteristic 
than  this  familiar  and  friendly  discussion  between 
master  and  disciple,  in  which  the  latter  gives  the 
reasons  for  his  anxieties  and  doubts,  and  reveals  the 
aspirations  nurtured  in  his  heart — aspirations  that 
fate  did  not  permit  him  to  realise.  Certainly  the 
man  who  could  feel  and  write  in  such  a  manner 
was  not  the  infernal  monster  that  Gregory  at- 
tempted to  depict  in  his    Colonna  Infame."  ^ 

''I  pray  with  all  earnestness"  —  thus  begins 
Julian — **that  I  may  be  able  to  confirm  the  hopes 
of  which  thou  hast  written  me,  but  I  fear  that  I  may 
fail  to  substantiate  those  exaggerated  expectations 

^  The  author  here  and  elsewhere  alkides  to  the  well-known  book 
of  A.  Manzoni,  La  Colonna  Jnfajne. — Translator's  Note. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  529 


concerning  me  that  thou  hast  aroused  in  others,  and 
yet  more  in  thyself.  Having  convinced  myself,  a 
long  time  ago,  that  it  was  my  duty  to  emulate 
Alexander  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  not  to  mention 
others,  celebrated  for  their  virtues,  I  am  overcome 
by  a  great  fear  and  agitation  lest  I  should  appear 
entirely  to  lack  the  courage  of  the  former,  and  be 
incapable  of  emulating,  in  the  slightest  degree,  the 
perfect  virtue  of  the  latter.  Thinking  of  all  this,  I 
felt  myself  inclined  to  praise  a  life  without  cares, 
and  it  was  delightful  to  me  to  recall  our  conversa- 
tions at  Athens,  and  I  only  desired  to  sing  to  you, 
O  my  friend,  similar  to  those  who,  carrying  great ^ 
weights,  sing  to  lessen  their  suffering.  But  thou, 
by  thy  recent  letter,  hast  greatly  augmented  my 
fears,  and  rendered  the  struggle  more  arduous, 
by  telling  me  that  God  has  entrusted  me  with  the 
same  mission  as  that  through  which  Hercules  and 
Dionysus,  at  the  same  time  sages  and  kings,  cleansed 
the  land  and  the  sea  of  the  foulness  by  which  they 
were  defiled.  Thou  wilt  that  I  should  divest  my- 
self of  all  ideas  of  quiet  and  repose,  and  should 
endeavour  to  act  in  a  manner  worthy  of  these 
expectations.  And  then  thou  callest  to  mind  the 
lawgivers,  Solon,  Pittacus,  Lycurgus,  and  thou  dost 
add  that  I  am  expected  to  be,  even  more  than 
these,  impeccable  in  my  justice.  Reading  these 
words,  I  am  astounded,  since  I  well  know  that 
thou  wouldst  never  stoop  either  to  flattery  or  deceit, 
and,  as  to  myself,  I  am  well  aware  that  nature  has 

VOL.  II. — 14 


530  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


not  endowed  me  with  any  special  quality,  except 
one,  the  love  of  philosophy.  And  here  I  will  not 
mention  the  adverse  circumstances  that,  until  now, 
have  rendered  fruitless  this  my  one  devotion.  I, 
therefore,  did  not  know  what  to  think  of  thy  words, 
when  God  suggested  to  me  that  thou,  perhaps, 
hadst  desired  to  encourage  me  with  praise,  and  by 
exposing  to  me  the  extent  of  the  difficulties  with 
which  the  life  of  the  statesman  is  surrounded.  But 
this  discourse,  far  from  encouraging  me  in  this 
manner  of  life,  rather  dissuades  me  from  adopting 
it.  If  one  accustomed  to  navigate  the  Bosphorus, 
and  even  that  with  difficulty  and  not  willingly, 
should  hear  predicted  by  some  expert  in  the  art  of 
divination,  that  he  is  destined  soon  to  cross  the 
yEgean  and  Ionian  Seas,  and  venture  afar  on 
the  high  ocean,  and  the  soothsayer  should  add  : 
'  Now  thou  dost  not  lose  sight  of  the  walls  and 
the  harbours,  but  there  thou  shalt  see  neither  light- 
house nor  rock,  and  consider  thyself  fortunate  if 
thou  canst  sight  a  distant  ship,  and  be  able  to 
speak  with  the  navigators,  and  again  and  again  thou 
shalt  pray  God  to  let  thee  touch  land,  to  permit 
thee  to  enter  the  harbour  before  thy  life  is  ended, 
so  that  thou  mayst  give  over  the  ship  intact,  restore 
the  sailors  safe  and  sound  to  their  families,  and 
give  thy  body  to  thy  native  earth,  and  even  admit- 
ting that  all  this  will  happen,  thou  wilt  not  be  sure 
of  it  until  the  last  day,' — dost  thou  believe  that  he 
who  would  hear  this  discourse  would  choose  for  his 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  531 

abode  a  city  near  the  sea,  or  would  he  not  rather 
bid  adieu  to  wealth  and  the  advantages  of  com- 
merce, consider  as  naught  the  acquaintance  of 
illustrious  men,  of  foreign  friends,  of  nations  and 
cities,  and  adopt,  as  most  wise,  the  saying  of 
Epicurus,  who  teaches  us  to  live  in  obscurity  ? 
And  it  looks  as  if,  well  knowing  all  this,  thou  hast 
wished  to  warn  me  by  including  me  likewise  in  the 
reproofs  that  thou  hast  addressed  to  Epicurus,  and 
by  combating,  in  him,  my  own  convictions."^  And 
Julian  goes  on  to  affirm  that  he  does  not  deserve 
these  indirect  reproofs,  because  no  one  abhors  a 
lazy  existence  more  than  he  does.  And  it  is  only 
natural  that  he  should  experience  the  greatest 
hesitation  in  assuming  an  office  that  requires  so 
many  special  gifts,  one  in  which,  after  all,  luck 
has  a  greater  influence  than  virtue.  And  Fortune 
presents  a  double  danger,  because  when  it  is 
adverse  it  brings  us  low,  and  when  favourable,  it 
corrupts  us.  And  it  is  even  more  difficult  to  issue 
unscathed  from  the  second  danger  than  from  the 
first.  Julian  demonstrates  that  prosperity  caused 
the  ruin  of  Alexander,  the  Persians,  the  Mace- 
donians, the  Athenians,  the  Syracusians,  the 
magistrates  of  Sparta,  the  generals  of  Rome,  and 
thousands  of  emperors  and  kings.  Here  Julian 
invokes  the  testimony  of  Plato,  who,  in  his 
marvellous  "  Laws,"  demonstrates  the  power  of 
fortune  in  the  government  of  human  affairs,  and 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  328,  i  sq. 


532 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


what  is  for  Julian  far  more  serious,  teaches,  by- 
means  of  a  myth,  that  a  man  chosen  to  rule  over 
nations  must  strive  to  emulate  the  virtues  of  a  god. 
After  quoting  the  text  of  Plato,  Julian  exclaims  : 
"This  text  that  I  have  here  integrally  reproduced, 
what  does  it  mean?  It  tells  us  that  a  king,  even 
though  by  nature  he  be  a  man,  should  become,  by- 
force  of  will,  a  divine  being,  a  daemon,  casting  aside 
everything  that  is  coarse  and  mortal  in  his  soul, 
except  that  which  is  necessary  for  the  preservation 
of  his  body.  Now  if  a  man,  considering  this, 
trembles  to  see  himself  dragged  into  such  a  life, 
does  it  appear  to  thee  that  it  may  be  said  of  him 
that  he  only  desires  the  idleness  of  Epicurus,  and 
the  gardens  and  suburbs  of  Athens,  and  the  myrtle 
groves  and  tiny  house  of  Socrates  ? "  ^  With  an 
accent  of  just  resentment  against  his  teacher, 
Julian  exclaims  :  "  Never  have  I  given  evidence  of 
preferring  ease  to  hard  work ! " — and  he  goes  on 
to  remind  him  of  his  youth  full  of  dangers,  and  the 
letters  he  had  sent  to  Themistius  when  at  Milan, 
before  leaving  for  Greece,  when,  on  account  of  the 
suspicions  of  Constantius,  he  was  exposed  to  most 
deadly  perils, — letters  "that  were  neither  filled  with 
complaints,  nor  gave  evidence  of  littleness  of  soul, 
nor  cowardice,  nor  lack  of  dignity."  But  it  is  not 
the  authority  of  Plato  alone  that  renders  the  young 
Emperor  timorous  and  hesitating.  Aristotle  also 
agrees  with  Plato  in  explaining  the  great  and  in- 

^  Julian.,  op.  at.,  335,  12  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  533 


superable  difficulties  to  be  found  in  the  government 
of  nations,  which  he  also  considers  a  task  beyond 
the  strength  of  man/    After  having  quoted  and 
commented  on  the  text  of  Aristotle,  Julian  con- 
tinues :  "  Because  of  this  great  fear,  I  often  permit 
myself  to  regret  my  previous  existence.    The  fault 
of  this  rests  with   thee,  not   because  thou  hast 
proposed  to  me  illustrious  men  as  models,  Solon, 
Lycurgus,  Pittacus,  but  because  thou  hast  advised 
me  to  carry  forth  my  philosophy  outside  of  my 
domestic  walls,  and  demonstrate  it  sitb  ccelo.  That 
would  be  exactly  as  if  thou  didst  say  to  some  one 
in  infirm  health,  who  with  great  difficulty  was  able 
to  take  very  little  exercise  inside  his  own  house  : 
*  Now  thou  art  arrived  at  Olympia,  and  thou  must 
pass  from  thy  domestic  gymnasium  to  the  stadium 
of  Jupiter,  where  thou  shalt  have  as  spectators  the 
Greeks  here  gathered  together  from  all  parts,  and 
above  all,  thy  fellow-citizens,  of  whom  thou  art  chosen 
as  the  champion,  and  some  barbarians  whom  thou 
must  fill  with  awe,  so  that  thy  country  may  appear 
most  terrible  to  them.'    Certainly  such  words  would 
deprive  him  of  all   courage,    and   cause  him  to 
tremble  even  before  the  ordeal.     Well,  by  thy 
words  thou  hast  put  me  in  the  same  condition. 
And  if  I  have  judged  rightly  concerning  all  this, 
and  if  in  some  respects  I  fall  short  of  my  duty,  or 
am  a  complete  failure,  thou  wilt  very  soon  let  me 
now.  " 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  337,  1 1  sq.  2  /^/^^       ^^y.,  340,  20  sq. 


534 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


After  having  thus  replied  with  dignified 
modesty  to  the  reproofs  of  Themistius,  who 
accused  him  of  lukewarmness,  JuHan  does  not 
close  his  letter  without  refuting  one  of  the  state- 
ments by  which  the  master  sought  to  recall  the 
disciple  to  a  sense  of  his  duty,  and  still  more  to 
awake  his  enthusiasm  for  the  work  he  had 
initiated.  Themistius,  it  appears,  had  written  to 
him  that  a  life  of  action  is  more  desirable  and 
more  worthy  of  praise  than  a  life  of  contemplation, 
and  that  he  should,  therefore,  be  happy  to  find 
himself  in  a  position  that  required  continual  action. 
Julian  answers  in  a  tone  in  which  we  recognise 
the  note  of  a  lost  ideal:  *'Oh,  my  beloved 
master,  worthy  of  all  my  veneration,  I  must  speak 
to  thee  of  another  subject  in  thy  letter  that  has 
rendered  me  uncertain  and  perturbed.  Thou 
sayest  that  an  active  life  is  more  worthy  of  praise 
than  the  life  of  the  philosopher,  quoting  Aristotle 
as  thy  authority."^  Then  Julian  maintains  that 
the  text  of  Aristotle  does  not  express  at  all  the 
idea  that  Themistius  wishes  to  convey,  since 
Aristotle  speaks,  it  is  true,  of  legislators  and 
political  philosophers  generally,  and  of  those  who 
are  exclusively  addicted  to  mental  work,  but  not  in 
the  least  of  practical  men,  and  still  less  of  kings. 
Yes,  says  Julian,  thinkers  are  the  most  happy  and 
useful  of  men,  and  their  glory  is  much  greater  than 
that  of  conquerors.       I    say   that   the   son  of 

^Julian.,  op.  at.,  240,  21  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


535 


Sophroniscus  has  accomplished  things  much 
greater  than  Alexander.  .  .  .  Who  was  saved  by 
the  victories  of  Alexander  ?  What  city  was  more 
wisely  governed  because  of  him  ?  What  man 
became  better  ?  Thou  wouldst  find  many  who 
through  him  were  made  more  rich,  none  who 
became  more  wise  and  prudent ;  on  the  contrary, 
they  grew  more  vain-glorious  and  haughty.  But  all 
those  who  are  now  saved  through  the  power  of 
philosophy,  can  be  said  to  be  saved  by  Socrates."^ 
The  philosopher,  Julian  concludes  by  invoking 
with  filial  reverence,  as  an  example,  the  life  of 
Themistius,  by  confirming  his  teachings  by  means 
of  his  actions,  and  by  demonstrating  in  this 
manner  how  he  would  wish  others  to  act,  is  a 
much  more  powerful  and  efficient  counsellor  of 
noble  acts,  than  he  who  prescribes  them  by 
decrees  and  laws. 

To  appreciate  all  the  peculiarity  and  interest  of 
these  considerations,  and  these  aspirations  towards 
the  tranquil  and  serene  life  of  the  philosopher,  we 
must  remember  that  they  were  expressed  by  a 
man  who  had  just  undertaken  the  most  hazardous 
enterprise,  a  man  who  had  come  from  the 
extremities  of  distant  Gaul,  with  a  handful  of 
men,  as  far  as  the  Balkans,  in  order  to  wrest 
the  Imperial  crown  from  his  cousin  Constantius. 
How  could  such  a  man,  on  the  morrow  after 
having  attained   his   ends,  abandon    himself  to 

^  Julian.,  op.  ci/.,  342,  7  sq. 


536 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


discouragement,  and  express  a  desire  for  studious 
solitude?  Certainly,  neither  Julius  Caesar  after 
passing  the  Rubicon,  nor  Bonaparte  after  the 
i8  Brumaire,"  would  have  expressed  themselves 
as  Julian  did.  It  cannot  be  denied  that,  in  the 
Epistle  to  Themistius,  as  in  all  the  other  writings 
of  Julian,  there  is  a  part  which  is  nothing  more 
than  a  scholastic  exercise.  But,  notwithstanding, 
any  one  reading  this  letter  must  feel  that  the 
thesis  Julian  sustains  is  not  wholly  artificial,  and 
that  it  is  the  true  expression  of  the  condition 
of  his  mind.  Julian  was  essentially  endowed  with 
a  contemplative  soul.  He  was  not  ambitious  ;  it 
was  not  lust  for  power  that  plunged  him  into  his 
perilous  enterprise.  If  there  had  not  been  a 
motive  that  strongly  impelled  him  in  this  direc- 
tion, Julian  would  probably  never  have  left  Gaul, 
and  would  not  have  accepted  the  Imperial  purple 
from  his  soldiers.  His  conduct  in  Antioch  was 
not  that  of  a  man  wild  for  applause,  or  of  one  who 
wished  to  curry  popular  favour,  and  to  extend  and 
consolidate  his  position,  but  rather  that  of  a  man 
possessed  by  one  single  idea.  This  idea,  which 
he  considered  it  was  his  duty  to  realise,  caused  him 
to  assume  a  part  not  at  all  consonant  with  the 
aspirations  of  his  soul,  in  which  the  ideal  of  true 
happiness  was  a  life  absorbed  in  study  and  the 
fantastic  hallucinations  of  his  mystical  dreams. 
The  secret  of  it  all  was  that  he  believed  himself 
to  be  the  necessary  instrument  of  a  predestined 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


537 


enterprise,  that  of  the  restoration  of  Hellenism, 
which  to  him  meant  the  restoration  of  wisdom  and 
virtue.    We  have  seen  in  the  allegory  of  *'The 
Discourse  against  Heraclius"  that  this  enterprise 
was  for  him  the  expression  of  a  divine  order,  and 
that  he  attributed  to  the  will  of  the  gods  his  safety 
and  his  designation  to  the  Imperial  throne.  And 
he,   most   certainly,  believed   this.     Julian  was 
wrapt  up  in  this    idea,  and  willingly  dedicated 
all  his  strength  and  intelligence  to  its  ends.  A 
group   of  illustrious   men — Sallustius,  Maximus, 
lamblichus,   Themistius,    Libanius — ^discerned  in 
him  the  only  hope  of  salvation  from  the  ever- 
growing tide  of  Christianity  and  barbarism  that 
was  threatening  to  sweep  away  everything,  and 
they  stimulated  him  and  spurred  him  on,  fearing 
that   he   might    not    prove    himself  sufficiently 
enthusiastic  in  his  action,  and  did  not  hesitate  to 
accuse  of  faint-heartedness  the  hero  of  Strassburg, 
this  indefatigable  general  and  wise  administrator. 
And  it  is  not  without  a  slight  feeling  of  bitterness 
towards  his  friends,   and   at   the  same  time  of 
modest  and  high-minded  dignity,  that  Julian  thus 
closes  his  Epistle  to  Themistius  :  "  The  gist  of  my 
letter,  which  has   already  grown  longer  than  I 
intended  it  to  have  been,  is  that — it  is  not  because 
I  fear  fatigue,  and  desire  pleasure  and  idleness,  or 
love  ease,  that  I  complain  of  political  life.  But, 
as  I  said  from  the  beginning,  I  have  neither  the 
education  necessary  for  it,  nor  the  natural  aptitude, 


538 


JULIAN  TOE  APOSTATE 


and,  moreover,  I  fear  to  do  harm  to  philosophy, 
which  although  I  dearly  love,  I  have  not  acquired, 
and,  furthermore,  in  these  days,  is  not  honoured  by 
our  contemporaries.  I  have  already  written  to  you 
about  this,  and  I  now  repel  your  accusations  with 
all  my  strength.  May  God  grant  me  good  fortune 
and  a  wisdom  equal  to  it !  But  I  feel  the  need  of 
being  helped  first  of  all  by  the  Omnipotent,  and 
also  by  you,  O  students  of  philosophy,  now  that 
I  am  called  to  guide  you,  for  whose  sakes  I  run 
these  many  risks.  If  God  through  me  means  to 
bestow  some  benefits  on  mankind  greater  than 
those  to  be  expected  from  my  education  and  the 
opinion  I  have  of  myself,  ye  must  not  become 
irritated  on  account  of  my  words.  I  am  conscious 
that  I  do  not  possess  any  other  good  quality  except 
that,  not  being  a  great  man,  I  am  aware  of  the 
fact,  and,  therefore,  I  beg  and  entreat  you  not 
to  ask  great  things  from  me,  but  to  leave  all  in  the 
hands  of  God.  Thus  I  shall  not  be  responsible  for 
failures,  and,  in  my  good  moments,  I  shall  be  wise 
and  temperate,  not  attributing  to  my  merit  the 
work  of  others.  Attributing,  as  is  just,  all  the 
success  to  God,  I  shall  acknowledge  my  gratitude 
to  him,  and  I  advise  you  to  acknowledge  yours." 

The  Epistle  to  Themistius  is  a  document 
highly  creditable  to  Julian,  and  an  eloquent 
proof  of  the  serene  tranquillity  of  the  mind  and 
judgment    of    the   young    Emperor.     Not  less 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


539 


interesting  or  less  adapted  to  reveal  the  nobility 
of  Julian's  character  is  the  Exhortation,  directed 
to  Sallustius,  in  which  he  expresses  to  him  his 
great  grief  at  seeing  him  depart,  and  endeavours 
to  find  some  reasons  for  courage  and  comfort. 
Sallustius  was  the  most  renowned  and  the  most 
wise  amone  those  men  with  whom  Constantius 
surrounded  the  young  Caesar,  when  he  sent  him 
as  his  representative  to  Gaul,  and  was  the  only 
one  in  whom  Julian  had  entire  confidence,  because 
he  felt  that  he  was  the  only  one  who  was  truly 
his  friend.  But  when  Constantius  heard  of  the 
rapid  and  signal  successes  obtained  by  Julian,  the 
perfidious  Emperor  decided  to  recall  Sallustius, 
because,  as  Julian  himself  says  in  his  manifesto 
to  the  Athenians,  he  suspected  his  cousin  on 
account  of  his  very  virtues.^  And  the  historian 
Zosimus  aggravates  this  accusation,  affirming  that 
Constantius  was  prompted  by  his  envy  of  the 
military  laurels  gained  by  his  cousin,  due  to 
his  havinor  followed  the  teachincrs  of  this  wise 

o  o 

counsellor.^  Whatever  the  cause  may  have  been, 
the  fact  is  that  Julian  felt  the  separation  bitterly, 
and  the  intercourse  with  his  distant  friend  was 
never  interrupted,  and  when  he  was  on  the  point 
of  leaving  Gaul  to  hasten  to  the  attack  of 
Constantius,  he  summoned  him,  and  confided  to 
him  the  government  and  defence  of  that  great 

^  Julian.,  op.  a'L^  28 1.  ^ih  ti)v  aperrjv  evOecos  dvT<^  yeyovev  vttotttos. 
-  Zosim.,  op.  cit..,  206,  6. 


540 


eTULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


province.  The  wisdom  and  perspicuity  of 
Sallustius'  judgment  appear  most  wonderful  when 
we  consider  the  fact  that  he  alone  compre- 
hended the  folly  and  the  danger  of  the  Persian 
expedition,  and  that  he  wrote  to  the  Emperor, 
who  was  preparing  for  this  unfortunate  under- 
taking, imploring  him  to  desist,  and  not  to  rush 
to  his  ruin.^ 

In  the  letter  in  which  Julian  takes  leave  of 
his  friend,  who,  in  obedience  to  the  orders  of 
Constantius,  is  about  to  leave  him,  there  is,  as 
in  his  other  writings,  a  large  dose  of  that  rhetorical 
scholasticism  which  is  the  tiresome  but  indispen- 
sable element  of  all  the  literature  of  the  Hellenic 
decadence.  But,  at  the  same  time,  there  is  the 
expression  of  a  deep  and  sincere  affection,  and 
a  refinement  of  sentiment  and  culture  that 
demonstrates  to  us  how  the  Hellenistic  con- 
sorteria  ^  —  to  use  an  ugly  modern  word  —  sur- 
rounding Julian  represented  the  select  few  in 
the  society  of  the  fourth  century,  already  half 
barbarised,  and  we  can  find,  in  this  very 
condition  of  aristocratic  intellectualism,  its  raison 
detre, 

Julian  begins  his  letter  with  words  of  the 
greatest  affection,  and  expresses  the  idea  that 
misfortunes,  when  supported  with  courage,  find 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cif.,  i.  316. 

2  "  Consorteria,"  in  Italian  politics,  is  the  union  of  a  few  men, 
mostly  of  ultra-conservative  views,  aiming  at  retaining  power.  — 
Translator's  Note. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


541 


their  remedy  in  themselves,  because  they 
strengthen  the  character  of  man.  "  The  sages 
say  that  to  those  who  are  possessed  of  intellect, 
the  most  terrible  misfortunes  bring  more  good 
than  evil  in  their  train.  Thus  the  bee  from  the 
most  bitter  herbs  that  grow  on  Mount  Hymettus 
distils  sweet  juices,  from  which  it  makes  its 
honey.  And  we  see  that  in  persons  naturally 
robust  and  healthy,  accustomed  to  eat  anything 
and  everything,  the  most  indigestible  food  is 
not  only  innocuous,  but  is  sometimes  even 
strengthening,  while  in  those  who  are  delicate 
by  nature  and  from  habit,  and  sickly  during  the 
whole  of  their  lives,  even  the  simplest  food 
produces  the  most  serious  disorders.  Now,  those 
who  have  given  thought  to  the  development  of 
their  characters  and  have  not  permitted  them  to 
become  entirely  corrupt,  but  have  remained  even 
moderately  healthy,  though  they  may  not  be  able 
to  rival  the  strength  of  Antisthenes  and  Socrates, 
the  courage  of  Callisthenes,  or  the  impassibility 
of  Polemon,  will  know  how  to  choose  a  middle 
path,  and  find  comfort  even  in  the  most  adverse 
circumstances."  ^ 

To  this  point  the  rhetorician  has  spoken. 
Now  the  friend  appears,  and,  in  accents  of 
the  most  sincere  emotion,  exclaims :  **  But  if  I 
examine  myself  to  ascertain  how  I  support  and 
will  support  thine  absence,  I  feel  that  I  am  as 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  212,  7  sq. 


542  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


deeply  grieved  as  I  was  the  first  time  I  was 
obliged  to  part  with  my  teacher.  For  in  a 
second,  behold,  everything  comes  back  to  my 
memory,  the  dangers  we  have  incurred  together, 
our  simple  and  guileless  intimacy,  our  frank  and 
wise  conversations,  our  partnership  in  all  noble 
enterprises,  our  equal  and  inflexible  detestation 
of  the  wicked,  and,  through  all,  we  lived  near 
each  other,  with  the  same  inclination  of  mind, 
friends  united  in  habits  and  desires.  And  in 
connection  with  this,  I  recall  the  line  of  Homer  : 
*  Forsaken  was  Ulysses.'  .  .  .  Since  I  am  now  in 
the  same  condition  as  he  was,  now  that  God 
has  taken  thee  away,  as  he  once  did  Hector, 
from  the  shower  of  darts  that  calumniators  have 
hurled  against  thee,  or  rather,  against  me ;  for 
they  wished  to  wound  me  through  thee,  well 
knowing  that  I  was  only  vulnerable  if  they 
succeeded  in  depriving  me  of  the  companion- 
ship of  a  faithful  friend,  a  valorous  comrade-at- 
arms,  and  a  sure  colleague  in  times  of  peril.  But 
I  am  sure  that  thou  dost  suffer  no  less  than  I 
do,  just  because,  not  being  able  at  present  to 
participate  in  my  fatigues  and  perils,  thou  art  much 
more  anxious  about  my  safety.  With  me,  interest 
in  thy  affairs  is  not  less  than  interest  in  my  own, 
and  I  am  aware  that  thou  comfortest  thyself  in 
the  same  manner  with  me.  And,  therefore,  I 
am  much  grieved,  because  to  thee,  who,  under 
all  circumstances,  couldst  say,  *  I  have  no  thoughts, 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


543 


all  is  going  well,'  I  alone  am  the  cause  of  grief 
and  inquietude."  ^ 

Julian  then  quotes  one  of  Plato's  sayings, 
and  insists  upon  the  difficulties  in  which  he  will 
find  himself,  forced,  as  he  is,  to  govern  without 
any  friends  around  him.  Then  he  continues : 
But  it  is  not  alone  for  the  help  that  we  mutually 
gave  each  other  in  matters  pertaining  to  govern- 
ment, and  which  rendered  it  easy  for  us  to  resist 
the  machinations  of  fate  and  our  adversaries, 
but  also  for  the  threatened  lack  of  all  consolation 
and  pleasure,  that  I  feel  my  heart  is  breaking. 
To  what  other  kindly  disposed  friend  can  I  now 
turn  ?  With  whom  can  I  have  the  same  sincere 
and  guileless  intimacy  ?  Who  will  advise  us  with 
wisdom,  reprove  us  with  kindliness,  who  will  spur  us 
on  to  the  beautiful  and  the  good,  without  showing 
arrogance  or  presumption,  and  who  will  exhort 
us,  freeing  the  words  of  their  sting  as  do  those  who 
prepare  medicines,  by  extracting  all  that  is  dis- 
agreeable in  them,  and  leaving  only  that  which  is 
beneficial  ?  All  this  I  reaped  from  thy  friendship, 
and  deprived  as  I  am  of  these  many  benefits, 
what  reasoning  will  be  able  to  persuade  me,  now 
that  I  am  nearly  dying  from  the  anguish  of  losing 
thee  and  thy  wisdom,  that  I  must  not  tremble, 
and  that  I  must  withstand  intrepidly  the  ordeal 
which  God  has  imposed  upon  me  ?  "  ^ 

Julian,  in  order  to  find  some  consolation,  for 

1  Julian.,  o_p.  c/l.,  313,  i.  -  /d/cf.,  op.  ciL,  315,  4. 


544 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Sallustius  and  himself,  refers  to  the  example  of  the 
ancients,  and  quotes  Scipio,  Cato,  Pythagoras, 
Plato,  Democritus,  all  of  whom  supported  with 
resignation  the  absence  of  their  friends.  Then  he 
narrates  the  experience  of  Pericles,  who  although 
obliged  to  forego  the  companionship  of  Anaxagoras 
when  he  departed  on  his  expedition  to  Samos,  still 
continued  to  act  in  accordance  with  his  advice. 
And  Julian,  wishing  to  make  his  case  parallel, 
attributes  to  Pericles  a  discourse  replete  with 
argument,  which  is  naught  else  than  an  artifice 
of  rhetoric.  Having  finished  this  scholastic  speech, 
he  continues  thus  : — 

"  Such  were  the  high  ideals  with  which  Pericles 
— a  magnanimous  man,  who  was  born  free  in  a 
free  city — admonished  his  soul.  I,  born  of  the 
men  of  to-day,  comfort  and  guide  myself  with 
arguments  more  human.  And  I  seek  to  lessen  the 
depth  of  my  grief  by  forcing  myself  to  find  some 
comfort  for  each  of  those  sad  and  painful  images 
that  appear  unto  me  out  of  the  reality  of  things."^ 

And  with  subtle  delicacy  he  continues:  "The 
first  thought  that  presented  itself  to  my  mind  is 
that  henceforward  I  shall  be  left  alone,  deprived  of 
an  ideal  company,  and  of  free  intercourse,  since 
there  is  no  one  with  whom  I  can  converse  with 
full  confidence.  But  is  it  not  perhaps  very  easy 
for  me  to  converse  with  myself?  Or,  is  there  not 
some  one  perhaps  who  may  deprive  me  of  thought, 

^  Julian.,  op.  at.,  322,  5. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  545 


and  compel  me  to  think  and  admire  against  my 

own  will  ?    This  would  be  as  wonderful  as  to  write 

on  water,  to  cook  a  stone,  or  to  find  out  the  imprints 

left  by  the  wing  of  a  flying  bird.    Therefore,  so  long 

as  no  one  can  deprive  us  of  this,  let  us  find  ourselves 

always  together  within  ourselves,  and  God  will  help 

us.     For  it  is  impossible  that  a  man  who  trusts 

in  the  Omnipotent  should  be  wholly  abandoned  and 

neglected.    On  the  contrary,  God  takes  possession 

of  him,  imparts  to  him  courage,  inspires  him  with 

strength,  suggests  to  him  what  he  should  do,  and 

prevents  him  from  doing  that  which  he  ought  not 

to  do.     Thus  the  voice  of  the  daemon  followed 

Socrates,  preventing  him  from  doing  that  which 

was  wrong.    And  Homer,  speaking  of  Achilles, 

exclaims — '  //e put  it  in  his  mind' — indicating  thus 

the  God  who  watches  over  our  thoughts,  when  the 

mind,  lost  in  introspection,  makes  itself  one  with 

God,  without  anything  being  able  to  prevent  it. 

Because  the  soul  needs  no  ear  to  learn,  nor  God  a 

voice  to  teach  ;  so  the  communication  between  the 

Omnipotent  and  the  spirit  is  independent  of  all 

sensations.  ...  If,  therefore,  we  can  believe  that 

God  is  near  us,  and  that  we  shall  be  united  in  spirit, 

we  shall  divest  our  grief  of  its  intensity." 

After   these   beautiful    words,  dictated   by  a 

spiritualism  as  pure  as  it  is  sublime,  Julian  amuses 

himself  by  adorning  his   letter  with   flowers  of 

rhetoric  culled  from  his  Homeric  reminiscences, 

and  then  he  concludes  as  follows  : — • 
VOL.  II. — 15 


546  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


A  report  has  reached  me  that  thou  wilt  not  be 
sent  merely  to  Illyria,  but  to  Thrace,  amidst  those 
Greeks  who  live  by  the  seaside,  among  whom  I 
was  born  and  bred,  and  where  I  learnt  to  love 
tenderly  the  men,  the  country,  and  the  cities.  And, 
perhaps,  in  their  souls,  all  love  for  us  is  not  yet 
extinguished,  and  thou  wilt  be  received  with  great 
joy,  and  thou  must  give  them  in  exchange  that  of 
which  we  have  been  deprived.  But  I  do  not 
desire  this,  and  prefer  that  thou  shouldst  return  to 
us.  But,  in  any  case,  I  do  not  wish  to  be  found 
unprepared  and  without  comfort,  and  it  is  for  this 
reason  that  I  congratulate  them  who  will  see  thee, 
after  thou  hast  left  me.  If  I  compare  myself  with 
thee,  I  place  myself  amidst  the  Celts,  with  thee  who 
art  amongst  the  first  of  the  Greeks,  famous  for 
equity  and  for  every  virtue,  a  high  exponent  of 
rhetoric,  not  inexpert  in  philosophy,  of  which  the 
Greeks  alone  have  penetrated  the  most  secret  parts, 
teaching  us  to  attain  truth  by  means  of  reason,  and 
not  permitting  us  to  apply  ourselves  to  incredible 
myths  and  paradoxical  prodigies,  as  is  generally  the 
case  with  most  of  the  barbarians.  But  whatever 
this  may  be,  I  will  not  further  insist,  as  I  must 
now  take  leave  of  thee  with  words  of  good  wishes. 
May  a  merciful  God  guide  thee  wherever  thou 
goest !  May  the  God  of  hospitality  receive  thee, 
and  the  God  of  friendship  guide  thee  safely  on 
earth  !  If  thou  must  navigate,  may  the  billows  roll 
smoothly !    Mayst  thou  appear  to  all  amiable  and 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  547 


honoured  ;  mayst  thou  bring  joy  with  thy  coming 
and  grief  with  thy  departure  !  May  God  render  the 
Emperor  benevolent  to  thee,  and  concede  thee 
everything  in  reason,  and  send  thee  back  to  us 
safely  and  quickly !  For  this  I  pray  to  God  for 
thee,  and  also  for  all  good  and  wise  men,  and  I 
add  :  Greetings  to  thee,  live  happily,  and  may  the 
gods  grant  thee  every  blessing,  and  to  return  to  thy 
home  in  thy  beloved  fatherland  !  "  ^ 

Julian  displayed  in  his  affections  the  enthusiasm 
of  a  soul  imbued  with  lofty  ideals.  Those  who 
fought  in  his  camp,  and  had  assisted  him  in  his 
hopes,  his  designs,  and  illusions,  received  from  him 
a  species  of  worship. 

His  enthusiasm,  of  which  we  have  seen  many 
proofs  in  the  writings  we  have  cited,  is  mani- 
fested in  the  unlimited,  ardent,  and  hyperbolical 
admiration  that  he  felt  for  his  teachers — an  admira- 
tion that  often  induced  him  to  commit  actions 
which,  even  to  his  friends,  appeared  incon- 
sistent with  the  dignity  of  an  emperor.  Ammianus 
Marcellinus  tells  us^  that  one  day,  when  Julian  was 
presiding  over  the  Tribunal  of  Constantinople,  they 
announced  to  him  that  the  philosopher  Maximus 
had  arrived  from  Asia.  As  soon  as  he  heard  it, 
he  unceremoniously  jumped  up,  and,  forgetting 
everything,  even  the  case  on  which  he  was  about 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  326,  8. 

2  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cit..,  i.  273,  i  sq. 


548 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


to  pass  judgment,  rushed  from  the  palace,  impatient 
to  welcome  the  philosopher.  Having  found  him, 
he  embraced  and  kissed  him,  and  reverently  lead- 
ing him,  returned  to  the  Court.  Honest  Ammianus, 
who  did  not  participate  in  the  mystical  aspirations 
of  his  Emperor,  considered  this  excessive  admira- 
tion, publicly  rendered  to  the  philosopher,  a  proof 
of  ostentation  and  vain  glory.  The  judgment  of 
Libanius  is  quite  the  opposite.  He  admires, 
without  restriction,  Julian's  act.  Libanius  says 
that  Julian  had  revived  the  old  custom  of  being 
present  at  the  sittings  of  the  Tribunal — a  custom 
which  Constantius  had  abandoned,  because  he 
was  not  an  orator,  while  Julian,  in  his  eloquence, 
rivalled  Nestor  and  Ulysses.  The  Emperor  was 
all  absorbed  in  the  duties  of  his  office,  when 
the  arrival  of  Maximus  was  announced.  Julian 
suddenly  rising  in  the  midst  of  the  judges,  runs  to 
the  door,  moved  by  the  same  emotion  as  Chaerephon 
at  the  coming  of  Socrates.  But  Chserephon  was 
Chserephon,  and  was  in  the  gymnasium ;  Julian 
was  master  of  the  world  and  in  the  Supreme 
Court.  By  his  action  he  demonstrated  that  wisdom 
was  more  worthy  of  respect  than  royal  prerogatives, 
as  everything  that  is  admirable  in  royal  prerogatives 
is  due  to  philosophy.  Receiving  him  and  embracing 
him,  as  is  the  habit  of  private  persons  among  them- 
selves, and  also  of  sovereigns,  he  ushered  him  into 
the  Court ;  for,  although  he  did  not  belong  to  it, 
Julian  considered  that,  by  so  doing,  he  honoured, 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


549 


not  the  man  by  the  place,  but  the  place  by  the 
presence  of  the  man.  Julian,  before  the  whole 
Court,  narrated  that,  through  the  influence  of  the 
philosopher,  he  had  been  transformed  from  the  man 
he  had  been  into  the  man  he  was  ;  then,  taking 
Maximus  by  the  hand,  they  went  away  together. 
Why  did  he  do  this  ?  Not  only,  as  some  might 
suppose,  to  repay  Maximus  for  the  education  he 
had  received  from  him,  but  also  to  invite  all,  both 
young  and  old,  to  educate  themselves,  because  that 
which  is  despised  by  the  sovereign  is  neglected  by 
all,  but  that  which  by  him  is  honoured,  is  followed 
by  all.-^  Ammianus  and  Libanius  in  their  judgment 
see  things  from  opposite  points  of  view,  and  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other  is  wrong.  Ammianus,  with 
the  good  sense  of  an  honest  official,  deplored  all 
that  might  diminish  the  apparent  dignity  of  the 
sovereign  ;  Libanius,  a  fervent  Hellenist,  admired 
the  homage  rendered  by  the  Emperor  to  the 
philosophical  ideal  which  inspired  this  Re- 
naissance" of  polytheism.  But  Ammianus,  who 
practically  was  much  more  clear-sighted  than 
Libanius,  deceived  himself  when  he  imagined  that 
there  was  any  ostentation  in  Julian's  act. 

In  the  paradoxical  personality  of  Julian,  the 
most  contradictory  tendencies  were  united,  neither 
excluding  the  other,  and  they  manifested  them- 
selves, in  all  sincerity,  according  to  the  circum- 
stances and  events  of  the  moment.    Julian,  on  the 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.y  374,  5  sq. 


550  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


arrival  of  his  master,  forgot  that  he  was  an 
Emperor,  and,  for  the  time  being,  was  the  fervent 
and  sincere  Neo-Platonist.  His  letters  overflow 
with  expressions  of  ardent  admiration  for  the  philo- 
sophers who  had  initiated  him  into  the  mysteries 
of  reo^enerated  Hellenism.  Amonor  these  the  most 
enthusiastic  are  those  directed  to  lamblichus/ 

It  seems  that  lamblichus  wrote  to  Julian  to 
reprove  him  for  the  rarity  of  his  letters.  The 
Prince  replies  that  even  if  the  reproof  is  deserved, 
the  excuse  for  his  fault  lies  in  the  natural  timidity 
with  which  he  is  overcome  at  the  mere  idea  of  cor- 
responding with  such  a  man,  and  then  he  exclaims  : 
"Oh,  generous  one!  thou  who  art  the  recognised 
preserver  of  Hellenism,  thou  shouldst  write  to  us 
without  stint,  and  excuse,  as  far  as  possible,  our 
hesitation.    As  the  sun,  when  it  emits  its  purest 

^  It  is  true  that  their  authenticity  is  doubted  by  Zeller  (p.  680), 
because,  according  to  Eunapius  (p.  21),  lambHchus  died  while 
Constantine  was  still  living,  and,  therefore,  before  Julian  could  have 
known  him.  But  Eunapius  is  an  historian  so  untrustworthy  and  con- 
fused that  we  feel  authorised  to  doubt  the  accuracy  of  his  asser- 
tion. And,  on  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  understand  what  could 
have  been  the  reason  for  inventing  letters  from  Julian  to  lamblichus, 
when  Julian's  tragic  death  had  destroyed  every  trace  of  his  attempt. 
Besides,  these  letters,  of  which  we  shall  examine  some  parts,  bear  the 
unquestionable  imprint  of  Julian's  peculiar  style,  so  that  it  appears  to 
us  impossible  to  deny  their  authenticity.  Perhaps  they  were  not 
addressed  to  lamblichus,  but  to  some  other  leader  of  the  Neo-Platonic 
movement,  e.g.  Maximus  or  Chrysantius.  But  as  they  did  not  bear 
any  address,  a  copyist,  long  afterwards,  deceived  by  the  hyperbolic 
sentences,  on  his  own  initiative,  put  the  address  of  the  most  noted 
chief  of  the  school  to  which  Julian  gloried  in  belonging,  here  and 
there  altering  the  text,  and  introducing  particulars,  especially  in  the 
XL^th  Epistle,  that  do  not  correspond  with  the  real  facts  of  Julian's  life. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  551 


rays,  acts  according  to  its  nature,  without  consider- 
ing who  may  benefit  by  its  rays,  so  thou,  while 
inundating  the  Hellenic  world  with  light,  shouldst 
unhesitatingly  bestow  thy  treasures  even  on  those 
who,  out  of  timidity  or  respect,  do  not  render  unto 
thee  the  equivalent.  Even  .'^sculapius  does  not 
cure  men  for  the  hope  of  a  recompense,  but  simply 
follows  the  philanthropic  impulse  that  is  natural  to 
him.  This  thou  shouldst  also  do,  who  art  the 
physician  of  the  soul  and  the  mind,  in  order  to 
safeguard  by  every  means  the  teachings  of  virtue, 
like  a  good  archer,  who,  even  when  he  has  no  adver- 
sary at  hand,  keeps  his  hand  ready  for  every  con- 
tingency. Certainly  the  result  is  not  equal  for  us 
and  for  thee  :  for  us,  when  we  receive  thy  master- 
strokes ;  for  thee,  when,  by  chance,  thou  dost 
receive  some  sent  by  us.  Even  if  we  wrote 
thousands  and  thousands  of  times,  it  would  be  mere 
gambolling,  like  those  children  in  Homer  who,  on 
the  seashore,  build  up  mud  buildings  which  they 
let  the  tide  destroy.  But  thy  slightest  word 
is  more  efficacious  than  the  most  fecundating 
current,  and  a  single  letter  of  lamblichus  is  dearer 
to  me  than  all  the  gold  of  Lydia.  If  thou  hast  the 
slightest  affection  for  one  who  loves  thee, — and 
thou  hast,  if  I  am  not  mistaken, — remember  that 
we  are  like  chickens,  always  ready  for  the  food  that 
thou  bringest  us,  and  do  thou  write  to  us  continually, 
and  do  not  fail  to  support  us  with  thy  virtue."^ 

1  Liban.,  op.  cit.^  540,  16  sq. 


552 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Here  we  have  another  outburst  of  enthusiasm 
on  the  reception  of  a  letter  from  the  philosopher : 
"...  I  am  with  thee,  even  when  thou  art  absent, 
and  I  see  thee  with  my  soul  as  if  thou  wert  present, 
and  I  can  never  have  too  much  of  thee.  Thou 
never  ceasest  to  benefit  those  with  thee,  and  the 
absent,  to  whom  thou  dost  write,  are  rejoiced  and 
saved  at  the  same  time.  In  fact,  just  now,  when 
they  announced  to  me  that  a  friend  had  arrived 
bearing  a  letter  from  thee,  I  had  been  for  three 
days  afflicted  with  a  gastric  disorder,  with  pains  all 
over  my  body,  so  that  I  could  not  get  rid  of  the 
fever.  But,  as  I  said,  as  soon  as  I  heard  that, 
outside  the  door,  there  was  one  who  was  bringing 
me  thy  letter,  I  jumped  up,  as  one  beside  himself, 
rushing  out  before  even  he  could  be  there.  And  as 
soon  as  I  had  the  letter  in  my  hands,  I  swear  to 
thee  by  the  gods,  and  by  that  very  affection  that 
binds  me  to  thee,  all  my  pains  and  the  fever 
disappeared,  as  if  frightened  away  by  the  invincible 
presence  of  a  saviour.  Then,  when  I  had  opened 
the  letter  and  read  it,  thou  mayst  imagine  my  state 
of  mind  and  the  fulness  of  my  happiness !  I 
thanked  and  kissed  that  'beloved  spirit,'  as  thou 
callest  him,  that  truly  loving  intermediary  of  thy 
virtues,  through  whose  instrumentality  I  had  re- 
ceived thy  writings.  Like  a  bird  helped  on  by  a 
propitious  breath  of  wind,  he  had  brought  me  a 
letter  that  was  not  only  a  source  of  pleasure  because 
it  contained  news  of  thee,  but  also  dissipated  my 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  553 


ills.  Is  it  possible  for  me  to  describe  all  I  felt  in 
reading  this  letter  ?  Would  it  be  possible  for  me 
to  find  words  sufficient  to  express  my  love?  How 
many  times  did  I  read  it  half  through,  and  then 
returned  to  the  be^inninor !     How  often  did  I 

o  o 

not  fear  to  fors^et  that  which  I  had  learnt  in  it! 
How  often,  as  in  the  arrangement  of  a  strophe,  did 
I  unite  the  end  of  it  with  the  beginning,  as,  in  a 
song,  repeating,  at  the  end  of  the  rhythm,  the 
melody  of  the  beginning!  How  often  did  I  carry 
the  letter  to  my  lips,  as  a  mother  who  kisses  her 
child!  How  often  did  I  press  my  lips  on  it,  as  if 
embracing  the  most  ardently  beloved  mistress  I 
How  often,  kissing  it,  have  I  spoken  to,  and  gazed 
at,  the  superscription  that  bore,  like  a  deep-set 
seal,  the  trace  of  thy  hand,  seeking  to  find  in  the 
form  of  the  letters  the  imprint  of  the  fingers  of 
thy  sainted  right  hand  !  .  .  .  And  if  ever  Jupiter 
grants  to  me  to  return  to  my  native  soil,  and  I  am 
permitted  to  visit  thy  sacred  hearth,  thou  must 
not  spare  me,  but  thou  must  chain  me,  as  a  fugitive, 
to  the  beloved  benches  of  thy  school,  treating  me 
as  a  deserter  of  the  Muses,  and  correcting  me  by 
means  of  punishments.  And  I  will  submit  joyfully 
to  the  castigation,  and  with  a  grateful  soul,  as  if  it 
were  the  providential  and  redeeming  castigation  of 
a  devoted  father.  For  if  thou  wouldst  rely  on  the 
judgment  that  I  would  pass  on  myself,  and  allow 
me  to  act  as  I  wish,  O  wonderful  man  !  it  would  be 
for  me  the  greatest  bliss  to  attach  myself  to  thy 


554 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


tunic,  and  never  leave  thee,  for  any  reason  what- 
soever, but  remain  always  with  thee,  and  follow 
thee  wherever  thou  goest,  as  those  twin  men  de- 
scribed in  the  old  fables.  And  probably  the  fables  in 
which  this  is  related  appear  to  be  mere  jokes,  but, 
in  reality,  they  allude  to  that  which  is  most  sublime 
in  friendship,  representing,  in  the  tie  that  unites 
them,  the  homogeneity  of  soul  in  both."^ 

Notwithstanding  that,  in  the  ardent  phrases  of 
this  letter,  we  recognise  the  influence  of  a  fictitious 
exaltation,  it  is  impossible  not  to  admit  that  it  is 
the  manifestation  of  a  sincere  feeling.  No  other 
sovereign  has  ever  written  to  a  professor  of 
philosophy  as  Julian  wrote  to  his  teachers.  Julian, 
in  his  relation  to  Hellenism,  was  in  almost  the 
same  position  as  that  of  the  primitive  Christians, 
who  passionately  espoused  an  idea  which  they  saw 
adopted  and  understood  by  so  few.  He  earnestly 
intended  to  exercise  the  mission  of  an  apostle, — a 
mission  on  which  depended  the  fate  of  humanity, — 
and  therefore  he  felt  for  those,  who  appeared  to 
him  as  the  initiators,  the  champions  of  a  great 
movement  of  religious  restoration  and  moral  refor- 
mation,  a  deep  sense  of  veneration,  before  which  his 
Imperial  dignity  paled  and  bowed  humbly  to  the 
very  ground.  Julian  was  a  saint  of  Hellenism,  and 
he  would  not  have  hesitated,  for  an  instant,  to 
embrace  martyrdom,  and,  hero  as  he  was,  joyfully 
to  encounter  death.    He  therefore,  like  all  saints, 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  578,  21  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


555 


gloried  in  humiliating  himself  before  the  ideal 
grandeur  of  the  heralds  of  that  principle  of  faith  in 
which  he  had  found  the  regeneration  of  his  spirit. 
It  certainly  makes  a  curious  impression,  to  see 
such  exaororerated  devotion  for  the  teachers  of  this 

oo 

superstitious  Neo-Platonism  that  had  already  so 
greatly  degenerated  from  the  pure  pantheism  of 
the  great  Plotinus.  But,  in  the  first  place,  we 
have  seen  how  Neo-Platonism,  lacking  a  divine 
figure  and  a  well-determined  worship,  had  neces- 
sarily become  corrupt,  and  had  degenerated  into  a 
coarse  and  confused  symbolism.  In  the  second 
place,  we  must  not  forget  that  Julian  was  a  young 
enthusiast,  a  scholar  devoted  to  the  ancient  civilisa- 
tion, but  not  a  profound  or  precise  thinker.  For 
this  reason,  the  confused  creations  of  the  Neo- 
Platonism  of  his  time  could  easily  take  possession 
of  his  excitable  fancy.  Besides,  that  which  really 
lay  nearest  to  Julian's  heart  was  Hellenism,  the 
restoration  and  preservation  of  its  laws,  its  customs, 
its  literature,  and  its  arts,  which  had  been  the 
ornament  and  glory  of  the  Greek  world.  His 
enthusiasm  for  Neo-Platonism  was  a  secondary 
consideration.  Julian  was  a  fervent  Neo-Platonist, 
because  he  was  a  fervent  Hellenist.  He  saw  in  the 
symbolical  religion  of  Neo-Platonism  the  only  pos- 
sible substitute  for  militant  Christianity.  In  the  war 
he  waged  against  this  new  power,  which  threatened 
his  native  civilisation  with  destruction,  he  raised,  as 
a  holy  banner,  the  colours  of  his  mystical  teachers. 


556  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Julians  enthusiasm  for  the  idea  that  was  so 
dear  to  him,  and  for  the  men  who  represented  it, 
is  a  sure  indication  of  the  generous  and  excitable 
nature  of  his  character.  This  disposition  is 
especially  revealed  in  the  letters  to  his  friends,  and 
they  are  couched  in  a  form  and  style  which  we  at 
the  present  epoch  would  consider  decadent,"  or, 
to  express  it  more  clearly,  in  a  style  that  repro- 
duced the  exquisite  artifice  of  a  mind  delighting  in 
the  endless  elaboration  of  its  own  impressions  and 
its  own  thoughts,  and  by  the  subtlety  of  its  art 
weakened  the  efficacy  and  power  of  its  sentiments. 
But  there  was  in  Julian  the  writer  a  grace  that 
withstood  and  overcame  all  the  artifices  of  style. 
See,  for  example,  those  short  notes  he  wrote  to 
Libanius,  a  master  whom  he  venerated  no  less  than 
lamblichus  and  Maximus.  Libanius  had  promised 
to  send  him  one  of  his  orations,  and  it  failed  to 
arrive.    So  Julian  writes  :^ — 

Since  thou  hast  forgotten  thy  promise  (it  is 
already  the  third  day  and  the  philosopher  Priscus 
has  not  yet  arrived,  and  he  writes  to  me  that  he 
must  still  delay),  this  is  to  remind  thee  to  pay  thy 
debt.  Yes,  a  debt  which,  as  thou  knowest  well,  is 
most  easy  for  thee  to  pay  and  most  pleasant  for  me  to 
receive.  Send  me,  therefore,  thy  discourse  and  thy 
holy  admonitions ;  but,  in  the  name  of  Mercury  and 
of  the  Muses,  send  it  to  me  at  once,  for  in  these 
three  days  thou  hast  really  consumed  me,  if  the 

^  Julian.,  op.  ciL,  482,  21  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  557 


saying  of  the  Sicilian  poet  be  true,  that  expectation 
ages  one  in  a  day.  If  this  be  true,  and  I  know  it 
is,  thou  hast  aged  me  three  times,  O  clearest  friend ! 
I  dictate  all  this  in  the  midst  of  my  occupations. 
I  am  no  longer  capable  of  writing,  because  my  hand 
is  much  slower  than  my  tongue,  although  even  my 
tongue,  for  lack  of  exercise,  has  become  slow  and 
embarrassed.  Keep  well,  O  most  longed-for  and 
beloved  of  men  !  " 

And  having  received  this  long-expected  oration, 
the  enthusiastic  Emperor  writes  to  Libanius:^ — 

"  Yesterday  I  read  most  of  your  discourse 
before  dinner.  After  dinner  I  read,  without  stop- 
ping, the  rest.  Happy  thou  who  canst  so  speak, 
and  still  more  happy  thou  who  canst  so  think ! 
What  logic,  what  skill,  what  synthesis,  what 
analysis,  what  argumentation,  what  order,  what 
exordia,  what  style,  what  harmony,  what  com- 
position !  " 

And  to  his  beloved  Maximus,  who,  after  having 
remained  some  time  near  him,  desires  to  go  away, 
he  writes  : " — 

"  The  wise  Homer  decided  that  we  should 
receive  with  all  hospitality  the  guest  who  arrives, 
and  let  him  go  when  he  so  desires.  But  between 
us  two  there  is  much  more  than  the  benevolence 
arising  from  the  duties  of  hospitality,  that  is  to 
say,  that  which  is  derived  from  the  education  we 
have  received  and  our  devotion  to  the  gods  ;  so 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  494,  i  sq.  -  Ibid.^  op.  cit.y  537,  4  sq. 


558 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


that  no  one  would  be  able  to  accuse  me  of  infrino^inof 
the  law  of  Homer,  if  I  wished  to  keep  thee  a  longer 
time  near  me.  But  seeing  that  thy  frail  body 
had  need  of  greater  care,  I  allowed  thee  to  return 
home,  and  have  provided  for  the  comforts  of  thy 
journey.  Thou  canst,  therefore,  use  the  state 
coach.  May  ^sculapius,  together  with  all  the  other 
gods,  travel  with  thee,  and  permit  us  to  meet 
again !  " 

When  the  affection  is  less  strong,  the  phrasing 
becomes  more  artificial  and  laboured,  as  in  the 
following  note  to  Eugenius  :  ^ — 

''It  is  said  that  Daedalus,  when  he  fashioned 
the  wings  for  Icarus,  dared  by  art  to  insult  nature. 
I  praise  his  art,  although  not  admiring  his  thought 
of  entrusting  the  safety  of  his  son  to  soluble  wax. 
But  if  it  were  granted  me,  as  the  poet  of  Theos 
says,  to  exchange  my  nature  for  that  of  a  bird, 
I  would  not  fiy  towards  Olympus  or  a  sighing 
mistress,  but  to  the  lowest  slopes  of  thy  mountains, 
so  that  I  might  embrace  thee,  O  my  one  thought,  as 
Sappho  sings.  But  since  nature,  encumbering  me 
with  the  bonds  of  the  body,  has  made  it  impossible 
for  me  to  soar  to  heaven,  I  will  come  by  means  of 
the  wings  of  my  words,  and  I  write  to,  and  am 
with,  thee  as  much  as  I  can.  And  thus,  for  no 
other  reason,  did  Homer  call  words  'winged,' 
because,  like  the  fleetest  of  birds,  they  are  able  to 
penetrate  everywhere,  and  alight  wheresoever  they 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  498,  10  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


559 


choose.  Do  thou,  therefore,  write  also,  O  my 
friend,  since  thou  hast  equal,  if  not  stronger  wings 
to  thy  words,  by  means  of  which  thou  canst  easily 
overtake  thy  friends,  and  give  them  as  much 
pleasure  as  if  thou  thyself  wert  present." 

To  his  friend  Amcerius,  who  had  announced  to 
him  the  death  of  his  wife,  he  writes  a  most  sym- 
pathetic letter.  In  it  there  is  a  kindly  Stoicism, 
much  more  humane  than  the  unmoved  and  serene 
Stoicism  of  Epictetus  and  Marcus  Aurelius.^ 

"  Not  without  tears  did  I  read  the  letter  that 
thou  hast  written  me  announcing  the  death  of  thy 
consort,  in  which  thou  hast  expressed  the  depth  of 
thy  affliction.  Because,  not  only  is  it  in  itself  a 
most  piteous  circumstance  that  a  woman,  young  and 
wise,  beloved  by  her  husband,  and  mother  to  good 
children,  should  expire  prematurely,  as  a  flaming 
torch  that  burns  brightly  and  is  suddenly  ex- 
tinguished, but  to  me  it  is  no  less  sad  to  think 
that  this  misfortune  has  happened  to  thee.  For, 
least  of  all,  did  our  good  Amcerius  deserve  this 
affliction,  a  man  so  wise  and  the  best  beloved  of 
our  friends.  Now,  if,  in  similar  circumstances,  it 
was  my  duty  to  write  to  another,  I  should  feel 
bound  to  indite  a  long  discourse,  to  impress  upon 
him  that  such  occurrences  are  natural,  and  ought  to 
be  borne,  as  they  are  inevitable,  and  so  inordinate 
weeping  is  of  no  avail ;  and  I  would  repeat,  in  short, 
all  those  platitudes  that  might  comfort  an  ignorant 

^  Julian.,  o/f.  cit.^  532,  10  sq. 


560 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


man  in  his  sorrow.  But,  as  I  am  addressing  one 
capable  of  teaching  others,  it  would  seem  to  me 
out  of  place  to  write  a  discourse  that  could  only  be 
applicable  to  those  who  lack  wisdom.  Permit  me 
instead,  putting  aside  all  other  considerations,  to 
recall  to  thee  the  myth,  and  at  the  same  time  the 
reasoning  of  a  wise  man,  with  which  perhaps  thou 
art  already  acquainted,  but  which  is  ignored  by  the 
generality  of  mankind.  If  thou  wilt  use  it  as  a 
consoling  remedy,  thou  mayst  find  in  it  a  consola- 
tion for  thy  grief,  equal  to  that  which  Telemachus 
found  in  the  cup  offered  to  him  with  the  same 
intention  by  the  woman  from  Sparta. 

It  is  said  that  Democritus  of  Abdera,  when 
he  failed  to  find  words  wherewith  to  console  Darius, 
who  was  mourning  the  death  of  his  beautiful  wife, 
promised  him  to  recall  the  departed  to  life,  if  he 
would  only  furnish  him  with  all  that  was  necessary. 
Darius  having  answered  him  not  to  spare  anything 
that  would  facilitate  the  accomplishment  of  the 
promise,  Democritus,  remaining  a  while  in  doubt, 
added  that  he  possessed  everything  that  was 
required ;  one  thing  only  he  lacked,  and  he  did 
not  know  where  to  look  for  it,  but  that  Darius, 
being  king  of  the  whole  of  Asia,  would  be  able, 
immediately  and  easily,  to  find  it.  And  Darius 
asked  him  what  was  the  thing  that  the  king  alone 
was  able  to  discover.  Democritus  is  said  to  have 
answered,  that  if  he  could  write  on  the  tomb  of  his 
wife  the  names  of  three  men  who  had  been  entirely 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  561 


free  from  affliction,  she  would  suddenly  come  back 
to  life,  thus  transgressing  the  laws  of  death. 
Darius  was  much  embarrassed  because  he  could 
not  succeed  in  finding  any  one  who  had  escaped  all 
misfortunes,  and  then  Democritus,  smiling  as  usual, 
said  to  him  :  '  Why,  therefore,  O  most  unreason- 
able of  men,  dost  thou  grieve  so  excessively,  as  if 
thou  alone  had  experienced  so  great  a  misfortune, 
when  it  is  impossible  for  thee  to  find  in  all  past 
generations  a  single  person  who  has  not  suffered 
some  domestic  trouble  ? '  Now,  one  can  under- 
stand that  Darius,  an  uncivilised  and  uncultured 
barbarian,  a  slave  to  pleasure  and  passion,  had  to 
be  taught  all  this.  But  thou  who  art  a  Greek, 
and  hast  received  a  most  liberal  education,  shouldst 
find  the  remedy  in  thyself,  and  if  it  does  not 
become  stronger  with  time,  it  would  be  a  slur 
cast  on  reason  !  " 

Julian,  when  he  became  Emperor,  desired 
to  retain  the  friendship  of  his  old  schoolmates, 
and  was  never  more  happy  than  when  one  of 
these  evinced  a  disposition  to  approach  him  and 
visit  his  Court.  To  his  friend  Basil,  who  had 
written  to  him  to  announce  his  cominof,  he  re- 
plies  with  the  following  kind  and  encouraging 
letter  : — 

The  proverb  says,  '  Thou  dost  not  announce 
war,'  and  I  add  to  this  the  saying  of  the  comedy, 
*  Thou  announcest  golden  promises.'  Come  on, 
then,  and  follow  up  thy  words  with  thy  actions, 

VOL.  II.  — 16 


562 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


and  hasten  to  come  to  us.  The  friend  will  welcome 
the  friend.  Our  continual  community  of  occupations 
in  affairs  appears  troublesome  to  those  who  have 
not  accustomed  themselves  to  it.  But  those  w^ho 
have  these  cares  in  common  become  serviceable, 
courteous,  and  ready  to  do  everything,  as  I  myself 
have  experienced.  Those  whom  I  have  around 
me,  make  my  task  more  easy,  so  that,  while  not 
neglecting  my  duties,  I  am  also  able  to  rest.  We 
associate  without  the  hypocrisy  of  Courts,  which 
I  believe,  up  to  this  time,  is  the  only  thing  with 
which  thou  art  acquainted,  and,  under  the  cover  of 
this,  courtiers,  while  profusely  praising  one  another, 
in  their  hearts  hate  each  other  with  a  hatred  greater 
than  that  of  sworn  foes.  We,  on  the  contrary, 
though  reproving  and  scolding  each  other,  when 
necessary,  are  most  loving  and  intimate  friends. 
Thus  we  are  able  to  labour  without  effort,  not  to 
be  intolerant  of  work,  and  to  sleep  peacefully. 
For  when  I  keep  watch,  I  keep  watch,  not  so  much 
for  myself,  as  in  the  interest  of  others,  as  is  my 
duty.  But  perhaps  I  bewilder  you  with  my  idle 
chatter  and  nonsense,  and,  by  praising  myself,  I  cut 
a  poor  figure,  similar  to  that  of  Astydamas.  I 
have,  however,  written  all  this  to  thee,  as  I  wish  to 
persuade  thee  to  profit  by  the  occasion  to  render 
thyself  useful  to  us  by  thy  presence,  wise  man  as 
thou  art.  Hasten,  therefore,  and  use  the  Govern- 
ment courier.  When  thou  hast  remained  with  us 
as  long  as  it  is  pleasant  to  thee,  we  will  give  thee 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


563 


our  permission  to  go  wherever  it  will  appear  to 
thee  best."^ 

^  The  Basil  to  whom  is  addressed  the  letter  that  we  have  quoted, 
evidently  cannot  be  Basil  the  Great,  the  Bishop  of  Cresarea,  the 
companion  of  the  two  Gregories  in  the  struggle  for  the  Orthodox 
doctrines.  It  is  true  that  Basil  was  a  fellow-student  with  Julian  and 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus  at  the  school  of  Athens.  But  it  is  clear  that 
Julian  could  never  have  addressed  himself  in  such  friendly  terms  to 
one  of  the  strongest  champions  of  Christianity,  nor  would  he  have 
asked  advice  of  him,  and,  moreover,  in  this  letter,  he  alludes  to  a 
young  man  who  has  been  accustomed  to  associate  only  w-ith  courtiers 
— a  proof  that  it  could  not  have  been  Basil  the  Bishop.  Therefore 
this  letter,  undoubtedly  authentic,  is  not  less  undoubtedly  addressed 
to  quite  another  Basil  than  the  Christian  Basil.  But  in  the  Epistles 
of  Julian,  we  find  another  letter  (p.  596)  which  is  undoubtedly 
addressed  to  the  Christian  Basil,  but  this  is  no  less  undoubtedly 
apocryphal.  The  ignorant  conceit  that  inspires  this  letter,  which 
appears  to  be  written  by  a  vulgar  boaster,  cannot  be  attributed  to 
Julian,  with  whose  wit  and  modesty  we  are  thoroughly  acquainted. 
It  is  easy  to  detect  the  impostor,  who  writes  after  all  the  events  have 
happened.  Julian  describes  in  this  letter,  with  an  hyperbolic  conceit, 
the  greatness  of  his  power,  recognised  by  all  the  nations  of  the  earth, 
and  only  despised  by  Basil.  To  punish  him  for  his  hostile  attitude, 
he  orders  him  to  bring  an  enormous  contribution  in  money,  which  he 
needs  for  his  expedition  to  Persia,  and  threatens  to  destroy  Cassarea, 
if  perchance  the  Bishop  should  have  the  audacity  to  refuse.  The 
contents  and  the  style  of  this  letter  are  c^uite  sufficient  to  demonstrate 
its  apocryphal  character.  But  the  most  evident  proof  of  all  is  given 
in  the  ending,  in  which  the  forger  falls  into  the  most  absurd  blunder 
by  misquoting  particulars  furnished  by  Sozomenes.  This  historian 
narrates  that  Apollinaris  of  Syria,  a  Christian  scholar,  author  of 
translations  of  the  Bible  into  Greek  verse  and  of  moral  tracts,  written 
after  the  style  of  the  classical  models,  had  composed  a  treatise  to 
refute  the  philosophical  errors  professed  by  Julian  and  his  teachers. 
Julian,  Sozomenes  says,  having  read  the  treatise,  is  reported  to  have 
answered  the  bishops  who  had  sent  him  the  book,  in  only  the 
three  following  words  :  "  I  have  read,  I  have  understood,  I  have 
condemned."  And  the  bishops  are  reported  to  have  answered  on 
their  side:  "Thou  hast  read,  but  thou  hast  not  understood,  for  if 
thou  couldst  have  understood,  thou  wouldst  not  have  condemned." 
And  Sozomenes  adds  that  this  answer  was  by  some  attributed  to 
Basil  {v.  Sozom.,  op.  cit.^  507).  Now,  the  counterfeiter  who  has 
invented  Julian's  letter  has  put  at  the  end  of  the  letter,  apparently 
without  rhyme  or  reason,  the  three  words  with  which  the  Emperor 


564  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


A  most  charming  and  interesting  letter  is  that 
addressed  by  Julian  to  his  friend  Evargius,  to  make 
him  the  present  of  a  small  property  :  ^ — 

I  place  at  thy  disposal  a  little  property  of 
four  fields  in  Bithynia,  which  I  inherited  from  my 
grandmother.  It  is  certainly  not  sufficient  to  make 
a  man  who  comes  into  possession  of  it  imagine  that 
he  has  acquired  something  very  great,  and,  on  that 
account,  become  proud  ;  but  the  gift  will  not  be 
wholly  displeasing  to  thee,  if  thou  wilt  permit  me 
to  tell  thee,  one  by  one,  its  many  qualities.  I  may 
be  allowed  to  jest  with  thee,  who  art  so  full  of  wit 
and  amiability.  The  property  is  about  twenty 
stadia  distant  from  the  sea,  and  there  are  no 
merchants  or  boatmen  to  spoil  the  landscape  with 
their  chatter  and  aggressiveness.  However,  the 
gifts  of  Nereus  do  not  fail  there  ;  the  fish  are  fresh 
and  still  quivering,  and,  from  an  eminence,  at  a 
short  distance  from  the  house,  thou  wilt  be  able  to 
see  the  Propontis,  and  the  islands  and  the  town 
which  has  taken  its  name  from  the  great  Emperor  ; 
thou  wilt  not  tread  on  fucus  and  seaweed,  nor  be 
disgusted  by  the  nauseous  refuse  cast  up  by  the 
sea  on  the  shore  and  other  unnamed  filth,  but 
thou  wilt  have  around  thee  evergreen  trees,  and 
thyme,  and  fragrant  herbs.  Ah !  what  delightful 
peace  to  lie  down  among  them,  idly  perusing  a 

answered  the  treatise  of  Apollinaris — words  that,  on  this  occasion,  are 
unreasonable,  and  therefore  incomprehensible. 
1  Julian,  op,  cit.,  549,  18  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


565 


book,  and,  from  time  to  time,  resting  the  eye  on  the 
cheerful  picture  of  the  ships  and  sea !  When  I  was 
a  youth  this  property  was  most  dear  to  me,  because 
of  its  limpid  springs,  a  delicious  bathing-place,  and 
a  kitchen-garden  and  trees.  When  I  became  a 
man,  I  often  longed  to  see  the  old  place,  and  I 
went  there  often,  and  with  reason.  There  you  will 
find  a  modest  specimen  of  my  agricultural  knowledge 
— a  tiny  vine  that  produces  a  sweet  and  perfumed 
wine  not  needing  time  to  perfect  it.  Thou  wilt  see 
there  Bacchus  and  the  Graces.  The  bunches  of 
grapes,  still  on  the  vine  or  passed  through  the 
press,  have  the  perfume  of  roses,  and  the  new  wine, 
in  the  amphora,  I  may  say  with  Homer,  is  a  draught 
of  nectar.  Ah !  why  is  not  this  vineyard  larger  ? 
Perhaps  I  was  not  a  far-seeing  agriculturist.  But 
as  I  am  temperate  in  my  tributes  to  Bacchus,  and 
much  prefer  the  Nymphs,  I  only  planted  that  which 
was  sufficient  for  myself  and  my  friends — a  com- 
modity always  scarce  among  men.  This  gift  is 
for  thee,  O  my  dear  chief!  It  is  small,  but  will 
be  acceptable,  as  coming  from  a  friend  to  a  friend, 
and  '  to  the  house  from  the  house,'  as  the  wise  poet 
Pindar  has  it.  I  wrote  this  letter  most  hastily  by 
lamplight,  so  if  thou  findest  some  mistake,  do  not 
reproach  me  too  harshly  or  as  one  rhetorician 
does  another." 

This  letter  is  a  little  masterpiece.  In  it  there 
vibrates  a  feeling  for  nature,  most  rare  among  the 
ancients,  and  an  exquisite  delicacy  not  possible,  save 


566 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


to  a  soul  open  only  to  the  beautiful.  How  many 
thoughts  must  have  crossed  the  mind  of  the  medi- 
tative youth  who,  from  the  solitary  hill,  immersed 
in  the  pages  of  Homer,  from  time  to  time,  con- 
templated the  sea,  the  ships,  and  Constantinople  in 
the  distance  !  This  last  son  of  Greece  experienced 
all  the  magic  influence  of  Hellenic  thought  and 
civilisation,  which  the  religion  of  his  tormentors 
wished  to  destroy,  and  he  dreamt  to  save  this 
civilisation,  to  give  it  a  new  life,  to  save  the  gods 
of  whom  his  favourite  poets  had  so  divinely  sung 
— those  poets  who  had  brought  so  much  glory  to 
a  world  that  now  repudiated  them ! 

We  see  how,  in  the  midst  of  his  tempestuous 
adventures,  the  soul  of  Julian  was  able  to  remain 
serene  and  susceptible  to  all  the  emotions  inspired 
by  nature  and  art.  He  endeavoured  to  act  in  all 
things  rationally,  and  believed  himself  successful  in 
his  efforts  to  curb  all  his  passionate  impulses.  His 
counsels  are  always  inspired  by  the  most  clear 
wisdom.  To  a  friend  he  writes  :^  We  are  happy 
to  hear  that,  in  the  management  of  affairs,  thou 
dost  strive  to  temper  severity  with  kindness  ;  for 
to  unite  forbearance  and  kindness  with  firmness 
and  strength,  the  first  so  needed  with  the  docile, 
and  the  second  with  the  wicked,  for  their  correction, 
is  a  proof,  I  believe,  of  no  ordinary  character  and 
virtue.  With  this  end  in  view,  we  pray  thee  to 
harmonise  these  dispositions  to  the  general  good, 

^  Julian,  op.  at.,  521,  11  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  567 


since  the  most  wise  among  the  ancients  justly- 
believed  that  such  should  be  the  aim  of  all  virtue. 
Mayst  thou  live  as  long  and  happily  as  it  is 
possible,  O  brother  most  longed-for  and  beloved  !  " 

The  rectitude  and  courage  possessed  by  Julian, 
and  so  justly  admired  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus 
and  Libanius,  are  most  evident  in  the  letter 
directed  by  him  to  Oribasius,  his  physician,  at  the 
time  of  his  disagreements  with  Florentius  in  Gaul, 
whose  financial  abuses  he  was  endeavouring  to 
rectify.  After  having  related  to  Oribasius  the 
dream  about  the  two  trees,  of  which  we  have 
already  read,^  Julian  thus  continues:  *'As  for 
that  vile  eunuch,  I  should  like  to  know  if  he  said 
those  things  you  refer  to  me,  before  or  after  he  had 
met  me.  As  to  his  actions,  it  is  well  known  that 
several  times,  when  he  treated  the  inhabitants  of 
this  province  most  unjustly,  I  kept  silent  even  more 
than  it  was  my  duty  to  do,  refusing  to  listen  to  this 
one,  not  receiving  the  next,  and  not  believing  the 
third,  ever  attributing  his  faults  to  those  who  were 
around  him.  But  when  he  attempted  to  make  me 
a  partner  in  his  shameless  frauds,  by  forwarding  to 
me  his  infamous  reports,  what  could  I  do  ?  Be 
silent,  or  fight  it  out  ?  The  first  course  was  ignoble, 
servile,  and  wicked  ;  the  second,  just  and  courageous, 
but  not  permissible  under  existing  circumstances. 
What  did  I,  therefore,  do?  In  the  presence  of 
many  persons  whom  I  well  knew  would  repeat  to 
^  See  vol.  i.  p.  86. 


568 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


him  my  words,  I  exclaimed  :  *  He  must  certainly 
rectify  these  reports,  as  they  are  most  reprehensible.' 
Notwithstanding  that  he  had  heard  this,  and  was 
so  near  me,  he  refused  to  act  with  wisdom,  and 
committed  crimes  which  would  have  been  im- 
possible to  a  tyrant  who  still  possessed  an  atom 
of  reason.  And  now,  how  should  a  man  who 
follows  the  doctrines  of  Plato  and  Aristotle  act  on 
such  an  occasion  ?  Not  take  any  interest  in  the 
unfortunate  people,  and  let  them  fall  a  prey  to 
thieves,  or  defend  them  by  every  means  in  his 
power  ?  But  to  me  it  appears  shameful  that  while 
in  war  the  officers  who  abandon  their  troops  are 
condemned  to  death  and  deprived  of  all  funeral 
honours,  it  should  be  permitted  to  abandon  the 
ranks  of  these  unfortunate  people  when  they  must 
struggle  against  thieves  ;  besides,  we  have  God  on 
our  side — God  who  gave  us  our  position.  And  if 
it  fall  to  my  lot  to  suffer  on  account  of  this,  I  shall 
feel  myself  not  a  little  encouraged  by  my  conscience. 
And  even  if  I  were  obliged  to  yield  my  position 
to  a  successor,  it  would  not  grieve  me,  because  a 
short  and  useful  life  is  to  be  preferred  to  one  that 
is  long  and  full  of  evil."^ 

Julian's  account  corresponds  so  exactly  with  the 
description  of  Florentius  and  with  the  episode 
related  by  Libanius  that  it  seems  impossible  to 
raise  any  doubts  concerning  the  identity  of  this 
person.    But  that  he  should  call  him  a  "  eunuch  " 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  496,  1 5  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  569 


is  inexplicable,  as  Florentius  had  a  wife  and 
children.  Some  see,  therefore,  in  this  enemy  of 
whom  Julian  speaks  the  courtier  Eusebius — that 
eunuch  who  ruled  at  his  will  the  Court  of 
Constantius,  and  pursued  Julian  with  his  bitter 
hatred.  To  this  end,  they  imagine  that  Eusebius 
was  sent  by  the  Emperor  to  Gaul  to  make  an 
inspection,  and  that  hence  arose  the  conflict 
with  Julian.^  This  is,  of  course,  possible,  but  is, 
undoubtedly,  invented,  and  it  is  far  more  reason- 
able to  suppose  that  the  word  dvSpoywo^;"  was 
simply  meant  as  an  insult,  rather  than  as  the  indica- 
tion of  a  real  condition. 

However,  notwithstanding  this  great  wisdom 
with  which  Julian  strove  to  direct  his  life,  he,  as 
we  have  seen  in  the  course  of  these  studies,  some- 
times abandoned  himself  to  the  influence  of  passion. 
It  is  certainly  impossible  to  admire  either  his 
conduct  towards  the  courtiers  of  Constantine  on 
the  morrow  of  his  victory,  or  to  justify  his  fury 
against  Athanasius.  In  his  private  correspondence 
we  find  traces  of  untrammelled  desires  and  of  de- 
plorable excesses.  The  case  is,  however,  curious, 
and  serves  to  throw  light  on  his  figure  so  full  of 
complications  and  contradictions.  Julian  had  a 
real  mania  for  reading.  We  have  seen  with 
what  transports  of  joy  he  thanked  the  Empress 
Eusebia,  who,  when  he  was  about  to  leave  Milan 
for  Gaul,  made  him  a  present  of  a  whole  library, 

^  Kock,  Kaiser  Julian^  449. 


570 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


knowing  that  he  was  absolutely  without  books. 
When  Bishop  George  was  assassinated  in 
Alexandria,  the  Emperor  sent  a  good  scolding 
to  the  Alexandrians/  but  did  not  further  punish 
them,  and  it  is  no  hasty  judgment  to  say  that 
he  was  not  displeased  with  a  tumult  apparently 
fomented  by  hatred  against  the  Christians.  Julian 
seemed  preoccupied  by  only  one  thought,  i.e.,  that 
of  getting  possession  of  the  books  belonging  to  the 
murdered  Bishop.  To  gratify  this  desire,  he  dis- 
plays an  energy  that  degenerates  into  injustice 
and  cruelty.  As  soon  as  he  hears  of  the  death 
of  George,  he  writes  to  the  Prefect  of  Egypt :  ^ 
Some  love  horses,  others  love  birds,  others  again, 
ferocious  animals.  I,  from  my  earliest  childhood, 
have  never  loved  anything  more  than  I  do  books. 
It  would,  therefore,  be  absurd  that  I  should  allow 
these  men  to  take  possession  of  them,  who  do  not 
consider  gold  sufficient  to  satisfy  their  lust  for 
riches,  and  think  that  they  may  easily  deprive  me  of 
them.  You  will,  therefore,  do  me  a  signal  favour  by 
collecting  all  the  books  of  George.  He  had  many 
of  them  concerning  philosophy  and  rhetoric,  and 
many  that  contained  the  doctrine  of  the  impious 
Galileans.  I  would  willingly  see  the  last-named 
all  destroyed,  if  I  did  not  fear  that  some  good 
and  useful  books  might,  at  the  same  time,  by 
mistake  be  destroyed.  Make,  therefore,  the  most 
minute  search  concerning  them.    In  this  search 

^  See  vol.  ii.  p.  340  sq.  ^  Julian.,  op.  cit.y  487,  1 1  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  571 


the  secretary  of  George  may  be  of  great  help  to 
you,  and  if  he  really  will  afford  you  all  necessary 
information  concerning  them,  give  him  his  freedom 
in  recompense.  But  if  he  try  to  deceive  you  in 
this  affair,  submit  him  immediately  to  the  torture. 
I  know  most  of  George's  books,  if  not  all  of  them  ; 
for  he  lent  them  to  me  when  I  was  staying  in 
Cappadocia,  in  order  that  I  might  copy  them,  and 
then  took  them  back." 

It  appears  that  the  Prefect  of  Egypt  was  that 
unhappy  iEdychius  who,  a  little  time  afterwards, 
felt  all  the  brunt  of  Julian's  anger  because  he  did 
not  show  himself  sufficiently  energetic  against 
Athanasius.  It  seems  that  he  did  not  have 
much  success  in  his  efforts  to  collect  the  books 
of  the  murdered  Bishop,  and  that  even  the  torture 
inflicted  on  the  secretary  did  not  help  him  to 
attain  his  aim.  This  is  evident,  for  we  find 
among  his  letters  the  following  note  directed  to 
Porphyry,  who  must  have  been  an  official  in 
the  Egyptian  Administration:^  ''George  had  a 
large  and  magnificent  library.  There  were  books 
of  philosophy  of  all  schools,  many  histories,  and 
not  an  inferior  number  of  books  of  the  Galileans. 
Search  again  for  this  library  in  great  haste,  and 
send  it  to  me  in  Antioch,  and  remember  that  thou 
wilt  expose  thyself  to  a  most  severe  punishment 
if  thou  dost  not  take  every  precaution  to  find  it  ; 
and  if  thou  dost  not  succeed  by  means  of  threats 

^  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  351,  20  sq. 


572 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


and  oaths  of  all  kinds,  and  if  slaves  have  anything 
to  do  with  it,  apply  the  torture  unsparingly,  and 
oblige  those  who  are  suspected  of  having  stolen 
some  of  the  books  to  come  and  return  them  to 
thee." 

Now,  although  such  a  love  for  books  and  culture 
appears  most  admirable  in  a  man  like  Julian,  it 
by  no  means  justifies  the  violent  proceedings  that 
made  him  appear  cruel  and  tyrannical.  This  is 
indeed  a  great  blot  on  the  character  of  our  hero. 
But  we  believe  the  case  to  be  unique,  i.e.,  that 
a  man  powerful  and  wise  in  every  respect  should 
lose  his  head  to  the  extent  of  becoming  positively 
iniquitous  for  the  love  of  books !  Here  we 
have  before  us  the  man  in  his  entirety,  with  all 
his  innate  contradictions  and  his  marvellous 
versatility.  We  must  remember  that,  at  that 
time,  Julian  was  in  Antioch,  where,  in  a  few 
months,  he  was  able  to  organise  the  difficult 
Persian  expedition  —  an  occupation  to  which  he 
applied  himself  with  all  the  intensity  of  a  mind 
nurtured  on  military  experiences.  These  most 
absorbing  cares  did  not  prevent  him,  as  we  have 
seen  in  the  Misopog07i^  from  indulging  in  polemics 
with  the  Antiochians,  and  from  attending  to  an 
infinite  variety  of  religious  and  administrative 
affairs.  But,  in  the  midst  of  all  these  preoccupa- 
tions, he  still  retained  such  freedom  and  serenity 
of  mind  as  to  feel  the  longing  to  possess  the 
philosophical  library  of  a  murdered  Bishop.  In 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  573 


reality,  he  would  have  been  much  more  pleased 
to  have  these  volumes  in  his  possession,  many 
of  which  were  already  known  to  him,  and  recalled 
to  his  memory  the  beloved  studies  of  his  youth, 
and  to  be  able  to  unroll  respectfully  and  tenderly 
those  papyri,  containing  the  treasures  of  antique 
wisdom,  to  scan  these  least  known  documents  of 
Christian  literature,  to  find  in  them  new  arms  to 
combat  more  efficaciously  Christianity — this,  we 
maintain,  would  have  been  much  more  accept- 
able to  him  than  all  the  pomp  and  circumstance 
of  Imperial  power,  and  even,  perhaps,  than  his 
hoped-for  victories  over  Persia.  A  most  singular 
Emperor !  And  even  more  than  singular,  because 
his  crotchets  as  a  scholar  and  man  of  letters  did 
not  prevent  him  from  being  a  heroic  adventurer, 
a  great  captain,  and  a  w^ise  administrator. 

If  Julian  had  not  been  absorbed  in  his  religious 
Utopia,  and  had  not  rushed  to  his  own  ruin,  he 
would  have  been  able  to  reorganise  the  empire 
on  the  basis  of  a  wise  government,  and  restore 
its  prosperity,  as  he  had  done  in  Gaul.  In  the 
intercourse  we  have  had  with  Julian,  in  the  various 
contingencies  of  his  existence,  and  under  the  many 
aspects  in  which  he  has  been  revealed  to  us,  we 
have  found  the  most  striking  proofs  of  his  lofty 
idea  of  justice,  which  is  not  only  recognised  by 
Libanius,  but  also  by  that  impartial  and  severe 
judge,  Ammianus.  And  we  have  already  seen 
that  one  of  his  most  determined  purposes  was 


574 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


that  of  directinor  the  administration  of  public  affairs 
and  the  Imperial  Court,  so  as  to  free  the  State 
from  the  appalling  abuses  by  which  it  was  cor- 
rupted, thus  lightening  the  burden  under  which 
the  people  groaned  and  steadily  diminished  in 
numbers.  Gaul  had  hailed  him  as  the  restorer 
of  the  public  fortune  ;  the  Hebrews  were  delivered 
from  the  arbitrary  taxes  with  which  they  had  been 
charged.  If  the  Persian  enterprise  still  necessi- 
tated heavy  contributions  from  his  subjects,  the 
Emperor  had  declared,  as  we  have  learned  from 
Libanius,  that  his  victorious  return  would  be  the 
signal  of  a  financial  reform  by  which  the  exhausted 
economic  conditions  of  the  empire  would  be 
thoroughly  relieved.  The  radical  purification  of 
the  Imperial  Court,  and  the  expulsion  of  the 
numberless  parasites  enriched  at  the  public  ex- 
pense, which  Julian  accomplished  as  soon  as  he 
entered  Constantinople,  may  have  been  hasty, 
according  to  Ammianus  and  Socrates,  but  was 
undoubtedly  most  beneficial  from  a  financial  point 
of  view,  and  the  most  eloquent  affirmation  of  the 
young  Emperor's  justice.  Finally,  the  intense 
care  with  which  he  enforced  the  law  that  no  one 
should  be  excused  from  taking  part  in  the  official 
duties  to  which  they  were  called,  and  that  all  privi- 
leges should  be  abolished,  thus  rendering  all  citizens 
equal  with  regard  to  the  risks  and  duties  of  public 
administration — a  law  against  which  the  Christians, 
to  whom  the  previous  emperors  had  exclusively 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  575 


granted  these  privileges,  violently  protested,  as 
if  it  were  an  infringement  of  their  rights — must  be 
cordially  approved  by  all  impartial  judges. 

There  is,  however,  one  act  of  Julian's  ad- 
ministration that  we  especially  desire  to  notice, 
since  it  proves  the  solicitude  for  the  public  good 
by  which  he  was  inspired,  and  also  his  ability  to 
descend  from  the  nebulous  heights  of  his  mystical 
speculations,  and  to  set  apart  his  preoccupations 
as  a  general  and  a  reformer  to  frame  practical 
arrangements  of  affairs. 

In  the  letters  and  notes  which  Julian  addresses 
to  his  friends,  we  have  often  seen  that  he  gives 
them  permission  to  use  the  Government  con- 
veyance. When  he  invited  the  Arian  Aetius  to 
come  to  him,  he  allowed  him  to  use  an  extra  horse. 
These  curious  allusions  refer  to  one  of  the  acts 
of  administration  in  which  Julian  was  deeply 
interested,  that  is  to  say,  the  reorganisation  of  the 
Imperial  Postal  Service.  The  communications 
between  the  different  parts  of  the  empire — which 
consisted  of  almost  all  the  known  world — were 
rendered  possible  and  relatively  easy  by  an 
admirable  network  of  roads,  the  greatest  pride  of 
the  Roman  organisation.  On  these  roads  they 
organised  a  regular  service  of  transports  and 
couriers,  of  post-houses  for  the  relays  and  the  ac- 
commodation of  travellers,  which  greatly  facilitated 
traffic  for  the  Government  and  the  public.  The 
expenses  of  maintaining  this  postal  system  were 


576  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


supported  by  the  provinces  and  the  cities  through 
which  the  roads  passed.  Even  into  this  service 
abuses  had  penetrated,  so  that,  in  the  times  pre- 
ceding JuHan's  government,  they  had  become  so 
great  as  completely  to  disorganise  it.  All  the 
Imperial  officials,  high  and  low,  had  distributed  to 
whom  they  best  liked,  free  passes,  eveciiones,  and 
the  municipal  finances,  already  exhausted,  had  to 
bear  the  expense  of  the  citizens  who  travelled. 
The  Councils,  the  Episcopal  Synods,  which,  under 
the  reign  of  Constantius,  followed  each  other  with 
increasing  frequency,  in  the  most  remote  sees,  and 
to  which  the  prelates  hurried  in  shoals,  attended  by 
their  theological  attendants,  and  surrounded  by  all 
the  luxury  of  a  corrupt  and  overbearing  clergy, 
more  especially  brought  confusion  and  disorder  into 
the  postal  management,  and  forced  upon  the  tax- 
payers most  enormous  expenses.  Ammianus,  using 
words  in  which  an  ironical  intention  is  most  evi- 
dent, describes  "the  multitude  of  bishops  careering 
backwards  and  forwards  from  one  Synod  to  the 
other,  with  horses  and  carriages  belonging  to  the 
public  service,"  and  adds  that  Constantius  was 
so  intent  in  his  efforts  to  regulate  theological 
doctrines  according  to  his  arbitrary  will,  that  he 
cut  off  the  sinews  of  the  postal  system — rei 
vehiculariae  succideret  nervos."-^  Libanius  gives 
a  most  curious  description  of  the  deplorable 
conditions  into  which  the  service  had  fallen,  because 

1  Amm.  Maicell.,  op.  cit.,  i.  263. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


577 


of  the  terrible  abuses  to  which  it  had  been  subjected. 
The  city  authorities  could  no  longer  withstand  the 
exioencies  of  the  travellers.  The  animals  died  of 
fatigue,  the  drivers  and  couriers  escaped  to  the 
mountains  to  free  themselves  from  a  labour  that 
had  become  insupportable.^ 

Julian  was  no  sooner  on  the  Imperial  throne 
than  with  a  firm  hand  he  put  an  end  to  all  these 
abuses,  and  regulated  by  law  the  bestowal  of  free 
passes,  the  evediones,  that  only  could  be  granted 
by  the  governors  of  the  provinces.  The  inferior 
magistrates  had  a  limited  number  of  them,  and, 
in  each  case,  they  were  obliged  to  obtain  special 
authorisations  from  the  Emperor.  The  effects  of 
this  reform  were  most  salutary  and  rapid.  Libanius, 
after  giving  the  singular  description  which  we  have 
quoted  above,  and  saying  that  the  Town  Councils, 
on  which  the  expenses  rested,  were  totally  ruined, 
thus  continues:  "Julian  stopped  the  abuses,  pro- 
hibiting travel  that  was  not  absolutely  necessary, 
and  affirming  that  gratuitous  services  were  equally 
dangerous  to  those  who  granted  them  and  to  those 
who  received  them.  And  we  saw  " — Libanius  oroes 
on  to  say,  with  his  usual  exaggeration — ''a  thing 
that  seemed  incredible,  i.e.,  the  drivers  obliged  to 
exercise  their  mules  and  the  coachmen  their  horses  ; 
for,  as  they  had  once  suffered  from  the  effects  of 
over-work,  they  now  suffered  from  the  lack  of 
exercise."-    Taking   into   due   consideration  the 

^  Liban.,  op.  cit.,  i.  569,  9  sq.  -  Ibid.^  op.  cit..,  i.  570,  11  sq. 

VOL.  II.  — 17 


578 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


hyperbolical  tone  of  the  apologist,  the  fact  still 
remains  that  it  was  a  great  merit  in  Julian  to  have 
devised  and  effected  this  wise  and  civilising  reform. 
The  scrupulous  care  with  which  he  applied  this  law 
is  evident  from  the  very  few  permits  for  free 
passes  that  he  granted  to  some  of  his  friends  whom 
he  desired  should  visit  him.  This  law  established 
by  Julian  must  have  been  strictly  obeyed,  if  it  was 
necessary  to  have  the  direct  permission  of  the 
Emperor  to  obtain  a  favour  that,  only  a  short 
time  before,  was  the  acknowledged  right  of  the 
majority. 

Julian's  conduct  as  administrator  of  an  immense 
empire  is,  therefore,  no  less  admirable  than  that  of 
Julian  the  leader  of  powerful  armies  and  the 
organiser  of  great  and  hazardous  enterprises.  The 
only  administrative  error  that  he  committed  was 
the  economic  violence  he  exercised  concerning  the 
markets  of  Antioch.  With  the  exception  of  this 
mistake,  mostly  due  to  the  good  intention  of  the 
sovereign,  and  to  the  absolute  ignorance  of 
economic  principles  in  which  ancient  society 
existed,  we  cannot  find  in  Julian's  too  short 
reign  a  single  act  that  does  not  justify  the  asser- 
tion of  Libanius,  who  says  that  if  time  had  been 
conceded  to  him,  he  would  have  restored  the 
prosperity  of  the  whole  empire,  as  he  had  already 
restored  that  of  Gaul. 

The   integrity  and   kindness   of  the  private 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  579 

individual  are  evidently  demonstrated  by  his 
letters,  many  of  which  we  have  examined,  and  they 
give  evidence  of  the  exquisite  delicacy  of  soul 
possessed  by  this  youth,  who  had  passed  the  best 
years  of  his  life  amidst  the  hardening  influences  of 
war,  in  the  unrefined  atmosphere  of  military 
encampments.  There  is,  however,  one  circumstance 
in  Julian's  history  that  has  remained  obscure,  and 
concerning  which  his  contemporaries,  groping  in 
the  dark,  have  woven  a  net  of  suspicions  and 
legends.  We  allude  to  the  relationship  between 
Julian  and  the  Empress  Eusebia,  and  of  his 
conduct  towards  his  wife  Helena.  We  have 
already  seen  that  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  even 
though  a  friend  of  Julian  and  an  admirer  of 
Eusebia,  openly  accuses  the  latter  of  having 
murdered  Helena  by  means  of  a  slow  poison, 
which  was  given  to  her  by  Eusebia ;  but  in  order 
to  diminish  the  responsibility  of  Eusebia,  the  good 
Ammianus  says  that  it  was  done  to  prevent  Helena 
from  bearing  children.  We  have  also  seen  that 
other  calumnious  reports  were  circulated,  according 
to  which  Julian  was  said  to  have  poisoned 
his  wife  himself,  with  the  aid  of  a  doctor.^ 
Fortunately,  Libanius  can  with  great  ease  de- 
molish the  aforesaid  accusation.  But  the  fact  in 
itself  that  such  an  accusation  was  possible,  com- 
bined with  the  extraordinary  reports  related  by 
Ammianus,  proves  that,  if  not  among  the  people, 

1  See  vol.  i.  p.  94. 


580 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


at  least  in  Court  circles,  scandal  was  rife  that 
some  sort  of  love  drama  had  been  interwoven  in 
the  life  of  the  young  sovereign.  We  say  in 
Court  circles,  because,  if  the  scandalous  story  had 
been  disseminated  among  the  people,  Gregory 
would  certainly  have  heard  it,  and  this  would  have 
furnished  him  with  most  precious  oratorical 
matter,  and  it  is  easy  to  imagine  what  joy  it 
would  have  afforded  the  terrible  polemical  writer  to 
have  such  an  argument  for  one  of  his  eloquent 
invectives/ 

If  we  examine  with  greater  attention  this 
obscure  episode,  we  find  that  suspicion  might  have 
arisen  not  so  much  from  the  public  relations  of 
Julian  with  his  cousin  Eusebia,  but  rather  from 
his  conduct  towards  his  wife  Helena.  Julian,  as 
we  know,^  came  twice  to  Milan  while  the  beautiful 
Empress  was  there;  the  first  time  in  354,  when  he 
was  summoned  there  after  the  murder  of  Callus, 
to  be  impeached  and  probably  killed,  if  Eusebia 
had  not  intervened. 

Julian  was  banished  to  Como,  and,  later  on, 

^  Among  the  moderns,  Anatole  France,  as  far  as  we  know,  is  the 
only  writer  who  afifirms  the  positive  existence  of  a  love  affair  between 
Julian  and  Eusebia.  "  La  nature  du  sentiment  qui  unissait  Eusebie 
et  JuHen  n'est  guere  douteuse.  .  .  .  Tel  qu'il  etait  Eusebie  I'aime " 
{vide  A.  France,  Vie  Littdraire^  iv.  252).  When  the  witty  French 
critic  wrote  the  above-mentioned  lines,  he  was  evidently  not  ac- 
quainted with  the  bust  of  Acerenza.  If  he  had  seen  it,  he  would 
perhaps  have  found,  in  the  overpowering  manliness  of  Julian's  figure, 
an  additional  proof  of  the  possibility  that  the  most  beautiful  Empress 
loved  her  unfortunate  cousin. 

^  See  vol.  i.  p.  45  and  p.  52  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


581 


sent  to  Athens  ;  the  second  time  at  the  end  of  355, 
to  be  invested  with  the  dignity  of  Caesar,  always 
through  the  influence  that  Eusebia  exercised  over 
her  husband.   Now,  it  seems  highly  improbable  that, 
during  these  two  visits,  the  Prince  could  possibly 
have  had  secret  intercourse  with  the  Empress. 
The  Court  of  Constantius  was  filled  with  the  most 
determined  of  Julian's  enemies,  who  spied  his  every 
movement,  and  who  would  have  snatched  at  any 
occasion  to  prejudice  the  mind  of  the  Emperor 
against  this  hated  prince,  and  together  with  him  the 
audacious  woman  to  whose  irresistible  fascinations 
the  enamoured   Constantius  willingly  submitted. 
Julian,  in  his  panegyric  on  Eusebia,  speaks  of  her 
as  a  divine  apparition,  before  which  he  experiences 
sentiments  of  timidity,  reverence,  and  profound 
gratitude.    We  recognise  in  it  the  devotion  of  a 
devoted  subject,  but  not  that  of  a  passionate  lover. 
But  it  might  be  observed  that  this  panegyric  was 
an  official  document,  and  that  Julian  could  not 
betray  Eusebia    and  himself.    This  reserve  was 
imposed  by  the  most  elementary  prudence.  But 
the  greatest  importance  is  to  be  attached  to  the 
narration  made  by  Julian  himself  in  his  manifesto 
to  the  Athenians,  in  which  he  speaks  of  his  hesi- 
tation to  send  a  letter  to  the  Empress  on  the  day 
in  which  his  election  to  Caesar  was  being  decided,^ 
for  fear  that  the  letter  might  be  discovered.  Here 
Julian  undoubtedly  tells  the  truth.     In  361,  when 

^  See  vol.  i.  p.  53. 


582  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Julian  wrote  his  manifesto,  Eusebia  was  dead. 
Julian  was  a  declared  rebel,  and  there  was  no 
reason  why  he  should  not  speak  freely,  no  scruples 
of  prudence  necessitating  him  to  conceal  the  truth. 
We  must,  therefore,  believe  him,  when  he  affirms 
that  his  relations  with  Eusebia  were  so  far  from 
being  intimate  that  he  was  not  only  unable  to 
speak  to  her,  but  did  not  even  dare  to  send 
her  a  note.  Therefore,  between  these  cousins 
there  existed  no  intimacy,  much  less  a  love 
intrigue.  Their  mutual  sympathy  must  have 
arisen,  above  all,  from  the  identity  of  their  in- 
tellectual aspirations.  Eusebia,  born  in  Macedonia, 
was  of  Greek  descent,  and  had  been  educated  in 
Greece,  in  the  very  midst  of  the  traditions  and 
habits  of  the  ancient  civilisation  ;  so  that,  Julian 
says,  besides  her  beauty,  she  brought  in  dowry 
a  cultivated  intellio^ence  and  a  orood  education.^ 
Married  to  a  Christian  emperor,  and  entering  a 
court  in  which  the  great  dignitaries  of  Arianism 
ruled  supreme,  she  necessarily  followed  the 
religious  customs  of  those  who  surrounded  her. 
But  her  intellectual  preferences  must  have  been 
for  Hellenism,  in  which  she  had  been  educated. 
Now,  although  Julian  had  remained  away  from 
the  court,  she  must  have  heard  of  his  passion  for 
study  and  of  his  intimacy  with  the  philosophers  of 
the  time.  Eusebia,  therefore,  saw  in  Julian  a 
genuine  Greek  ;  she  could  understand  his  aspira- 

^  Julian.,  op.  at.,  140,  5  sq. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  583 


tions,  and  admire  the  manner  in  which  he  behaved. 
From  this  arose  the  desire  to  save  him  from  the 
storm  of  Christian  barbarism  that  threatened  to 
destroy  him.  JuHan  himself,  in  his  panegyric  on 
Eusebia,  thus  explains  her  reasons  for  protecting 
him  :  She  was  for  me  the  cause  of  so  many 
benefits,  because  she  wished  to  honour  through 
me  the  name  of  philosophy.  This  name,  I  do  not 
know  why,  had  been  applied  to  me,  who  although 
loving  it  most  fervently,  have  been  obliged  to 
cease  from  practising  it.  But  she  wished  to 
honour  this  name.  I  can  neither  imagine  nor 
understand  any  other  reason  why  she  has  so 
effectually  assisted  me, — a  true  saviour, — and  why 
she  employed  every  effort  to  preserve  intact  the 
Emperor's  benevolence  towards  me."-^  It  is 
Eusebia  to  whom  Julian  owes  that  which  he 
considers  the  greatest  happiness  of  his  life,  i.e., 
being  sent  to  Athens,  where  he  could  immerse 
himself  in  his  studies ;  it  is  Eusebia,  as  we 
already  know,^  who  furnishes  Julian,  when  starting 
for  Gaul,  with  that  rich  and  varied  library,  by 
means  of  which,  as  he  says,  Gaul  was  transformed 
into  a  museum  of  Greek  books. 

We  are,  therefore,  soaring  in  an  atmosphere  of 
pure  intellectuality.  Eusebia  and  Julian  appear  to 
us  as  two  spirits  of  poesy  and  wisdom.  Eusebia, 
in  the  panegyric  of  Julian,  is  represented  as  sur- 
rounded by  a  glorious  aureole  of  sanctity  ;  she  is 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  154,  16.  2  g^g  ^.qJ^  \ 


584 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


truly  a  divine  figure.    In  examining  her  portrait, 
as  it  is  sketched  by  her   devoted  and  grateful 
admirer,  we  seem  to  experience  something  of  the 
fascination  that  the  beautiful  Empress  exercised 
over  the  Milanese  of  fifteen  centuries  and  a  half 
ago.     Ammianus    Marcellinus,    who    had  seen 
Eusebia  at  the  Court  of  Milan,  and  knew  all  she 
had  done  in  favour  of  Julian,  has  only  words  of 
praise  for  her  virtue,  and  affirms,  though  writing 
after  her  death,  that  she  had  no  rivals  in  beauty 
of  form  and  mind,  and  that,  in  the  lofty  position 
in  which  she  was  placed,  she  had  been  able  to 
preserve  the  humaneness  of  her  soul.^  Ammianus 
does  not  seem  to  suspect  any  illicit  relationship 
between  Julian  and  Eusebia,  and  attributes  the 
actions  of  the  Empress  in  favour  of  the  persecuted 
prince  to  the  just  estimation  she  had  formed  of  his 
qualities.     But,  all  of  a  sudden,  Ammianus  darkens 
the  purity  of  this  image,  by  relating  an  episode  in 
which  the  beautiful  philosopher  is  transformed  into 
a  wicked  and  odious  woman.    We  have  already 
alluded  to  this  fact.    But  we  must  examine  it 
more  attentively,  as  it  is  necessary  to  dissipate  a 
mystery  that  might  have  a  sinister  influence  on 
the  judgment  we  have  pronounced  on  Julian's 
character.    We  know  that  Constantius,  when  he 
promoted  Julian  to   the   dignity  of  Caesar,  be- 
stowed   upon    him    in    marriage   his  own  sister 
Helena,   in  order  to  render  stronger  the  bonds 

^  Amm.  Marcell.,  op.  cif.,  i.  240. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  585 


that  united  him  to  his  cousin,  whom  he  had  re- 
stored to  favour.    According  to  Julian  himself,  this 
marriage   was   arranged    by    Eusebia/  Helena, 
the  daughter  of  the  unfortunate  Empress  Faustina, 
who,  according  to   Zosimus,^  in    326  had  been 
murdered  by  her  husband  Constantine  in  a  horrible 
tragedy  of  jealousy,  in  November  355  could  not  be 
less  than  thirty  years  old.     It  appears,  therefore, 
that    Eusebia    had  arranged   simply  a  mariage 
de  convenance.    But    Helena  became  enceinte  in 
the  following  year,  in  Gaul.    Then,  according  to 
Ammianus,   Eusebia   bribed   the  nurse,  and  she, 
with  an  intentional  error  in  the  obstetrical  operation, 
killed  the  child  at  the  moment  of  its  birth.    But  it 
seems  that  Eusebia  was  not  satisfied  with  this  crime. 
She  invited  Helena  to  come  from  Gaul  to  Rome 
on  the  occasion  of  the  solemn  visit  paid  by  her  to 
that  city,  in  357,  together  with  Constantius.  The 
pretext   of  this   invitation  was   her  affectionate 
anxiety  that    Helena   should   take  part   in  the 
Roman   festivals ;   the   true    motive  was   to  in- 
oculate  the   unfortunate  woman   with   a  subtle 
poison  that  would  cause  her  to  miscarry  when- 
ever she  was  pregnant.    It  seems  that  the  slow 
action  of  the  poison   undermined  the  constitu- 
tion   of   Helena,    and,   three    years  afterwards, 
caused   her   death  —  a  mysterious  death,  hardly 
alluded  to  by  Julian  and  Ammianus,  but  which 
the  enemies  of  the   former   unhesitatingly  attri- 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.^  159,  i.  -Zosim.,  op.  cit.,  150,  i  sq. 


586 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


buted  to  him,  as  if  he  himself  had  been  the 
poisoner  of  his  wife/ 

All  these  passing  rumours  appear  to  be 
naught  else  than  the  consequence  of  the  idle 
tattle  of  a  wicked  Court  accustomed  to  crimes. 
The  jealousy  of  the  mistress  must  be  excluded 
as  predetermining  cause,  as  it  is  almost  impos- 
sible to  understand  a  jealousy  that  is  exercised 
at  such  a  great  distance,  without  that  exaspera- 
tion of  passion  which  is  caused  by  the  propinquity 
and  sight  of  the  beloved.  The  jealousy  of  the 
childless  mother — Eusebia  had  no  children  — 
who  wished  to  prevent  her  cousin  from  having 
any,  and  which  was  revealed  the  first  time  by 
the  atrocious  infanticide  that  she  caused  to  be 
committed  by  the  nurse,  and  the  subtle  way  in 
which,  on  the  second  occasion,  she  invited 
Helena  to  Rome  in  order  that  she  might  give 
her  poison,  appears  inadmissible  and  incre- 
dible in  Eusebia,  a  woman  possessing  such  high 
culture  and  generous  impulses  that  she  did  not 
hesitate  to  undertake  the  perilous  enterprise  of 
saving  a  persecuted  prince,  defying  the  hatred 
and  machinations  of  powerful  courtiers.  Is  it 
possible  that  such  a  noble  woman,  who  had  done 
so  much  to  place  Julian  in  a  lofty  position,  where 
his  virtues  could  be  recognised  and  given  free 
scope,  would  condescend  to  base  envy  at  the  mere 
idea  that  the  man  she  had  saved  and  admired  so 

^  See  vol.  i.  p.  94. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN  587 


greatly,  should  be  the  father  of  children?  Is  it 
possible  that  of  her  it  might  be  said  ''tanta 
tamque  diligens  opera  navabatur  ne  fortissimi 
viri  soboles  appareret "  ?  ^ 

It  seems  to  us  that  the  most  probable  hypo- 
thesis is  that  Ammianus  accepted  the  inventions 
and  calumnies  aorainst  Eusebia  that  were  circu- 
lating  in  the  Court  circles  in  which  he  had  lived, 
and  repeated  them  without  any  qualms  of  con- 
science, just  as,  with  even  greater  shamelessness, 
the  enemies  of  Julian  turned  directly  upon  him 
the  odium  of  this  grave  accusation.  We  must, 
however,  admit  that,  if  these  calumnies  could 
have  been  spread  abroad  and  believed,  there 
must  have  been  some  facts  or  circumstances 
that  gave  them  at  least  an  appearance  and 
possibility  of  credibility.  Now,  we  have  no 
document  whatever  upon  which  we  can  construe 
the  true  history  of  the  relationship  between  Julian 
and  his  wife.  Nevertheless,  from  some  indica- 
tions, we  can  infer  that  Helena  was  an  unhappy 
woman,  a  neglected  wife.  Julian,  who  speaks 
and  writes  of  every  one  and  everything  with  such 
facility  and  abundance,  has  never,  in  his  writings, 
either  public  or  private,  alluded  to  his  wife, 
though  she  was  his  companion  for  the  five  years 
in  which  he  lived  in  Gaul.  In  his  panegyric  on 
Eusebia,  he  only  mentions  his  marriage  to  say 
that  it  had  been   arranged  by  her,  and,  in  his 

^  Amm.  MarcelL,  op.  ciL^  i.  94. 


588  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


manifesto  to  the  Athenians,  he  records  that,  at 
the  moment  of  the  military  pronunciamiento  at 
Paris,  when  the  troops  surrounded  the  palace,  he 
was  resting  in  the  upper  storey  in  a  room  next 
his  wife's — *'who  was  still  living."  This  icy 
still  living"^  (ert  r?}?  yafierrj^  fcoo"?;?)  is  Julian's 
only  funeral  oration  to  the  memory  of  his  wife. 
She  died  in  Vienne,  during  the  winter  of  360, 
when  her  husband  had  already  begun  to  act  as 
Emperor,  amidst  pomps  and  solemn  festivals. 
The  only  consideration  that  Julian  evinced 
towards  her  was  to  transport  her  remains  to 
Rome,  where  they  were  interred  in  a  sepulchre 
of  the  *'Via  Nomentana,"  beside  her  sister 
Constantina. 

The  unhappy  fate  of  this  woman  aroused  the 
imagination  of  her  contemporaries,  and  afforded 
elements  that  permitted  them  to  create  legends 
concerning  her,  and  to  find  mystery  and  crime 
where  there  was  naught  else,  perhaps,  than  a 
natural  development  of  unfortunate  circumstances. 
Eusebia  and  Julian  were  believed  culpable,  and 
authors  of  a  death  that  was  really  caused  by 
the  slow  and  continuous  persecution  of  a  relent- 
less fate.  Julian's  wife  is  one  of  those  pallid 
figures  that  pass,  like  a  fleeting  shadow,  across 
the  far-off  horizon  of  history,  surrounded  and 
consecrated  by  an  aureole  of  a  slow  and  secret 
martyrdom.     Married  when  she  was  no  longer 

1  Julian.,  op.  cit.,  266,  3. 


THE  SOVEREIGN  AND  THE  MAN 


589 


young  to  a  man  who  did  not  love  her,  a  Christian, 
and  educated  in  Court  circles,  from  which  all 
Hellenic  influences  were  severely  excluded,  she 
could  neither  understand  her  husband  nor  be 
understood  by  him.  No  intellectual  sympathy 
could  exist  between  the  two  who  had  been  united 
by  a  simple  tie  of  convention.  The  joys 
which  she  might  have  found  in  maternity  had 
been  snatched  from  her.  During  her  trying 
sojourn  in  Gaul  she  lived  in  a  continual  state 
of  anxiety  and  peril.  Every  day  she  saw  the 
struggle  between  her  husband  and  her  brother 
growing  more  imminent — a  struggle  to  prevent 
which  she  had  been  sacrificed  and  placed  use- 
lessly, as  a  symbol  of  peace,  between  the  two 
rivals.  The  rebellion  having  broken  out,  and 
Julian  being  proclaimed  Emperor,  Helena  was 
absolutely  overwhelmed  by  the  terror  of  a  fratri- 
cidal war.  Julian,  wholly  absorbed  in  his  prepara- 
tions, his  plans,  his  dreams,  took  no  heed  of  her. 
And  she  knew  her  brother  too  well  not  to  be 
aware  that,  if  he  was  victorious — and  everything 
seemed  to  indicate  the  probability  of  his  victory 
— he  would  take  a  terrible  revenge.  Torn  by 
these  cruel  anxieties  that  tormented  her  inmost 
soul,  Helena  wasted  away,  and  disappeared,  a 
meek  victim,  neglected  by  a  husband  who  was 
about  to  throw  himself  into  the  tempestuous  seas 
of  a  most  audacious  adventure. 

We  can,  therefore,  conclude,  judging  with  our 


590 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


accustomed  impartiality,  that  Julian,  although  not 
guilty  of  any  domestic  crime,  was  by  no  means 
an  exemplary  husband,  and  even,  most  probably, 
had  been  the  cause  of  his  wife's  great  unhappiness. 
A  fault  most  grave  in  itself,  but  one  which  might 
have  extenuating  circumstances  in  the  history  of 
the  husbands  of  all  times,  not  excluding  those 
of  the  present  day. 


CONCLUSION 


When  we  began  this  study,  we  said  that  no  one 
had  ever  suffered  more  from  the  inexplicable 
vagaries  of  fate  than  Julian.  The  Church, 
against  which  his  efforts  were  ineffectually  directed, 
revenged  itself  by  concealing  his  noble  figure  under 
an  odious  mask,  and  by  rendering  execrable  for 
ever  a  name  well  worthy  of  the  respect  and  admira- 
tion of  posterity.  After  having  devoted  ourselves 
to  a  careful  study  of  his  life,  we  find  that  our 
sentiments  of  commiseration  for  his  destiny  are 
more  and  more  accentuated,  because  there  is  not, 
perhaps,  another  example  in  history  where  such 
varied  and  noble  gifts  were  uselessly  squandered  in 
a  foolish  undertaking.  Few  men  appeared  on  the 
world's  stage  better  qualified  to  leave  a  lasting 
impress  on  history,  and  no  man  has  more  completely 
disappeared,  without  leaving  a  trace  behind  him. 
Julian's  work  was  as  fleeting  and  vain  as  the  furrow 
of  a  ship  on  the  surface  of  the  water.  As  soon  as 
the  poop  has  passed  through  the  waves,  they 
reunite,  and  the  furrow  is  no  longer  visible.  Thus, 
no  sooner  had  Julian  expired  in  his  tent  on  the  far- 

591 


592 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


away  plains  of  Persia,  than  all  memory  of  his 
ephemeral  attempt  vanished,  and  History  continued 
its  course  as  if  he  had  never  existed.  We  may 
even  say  that  Christianity  was  hardly  aware  of  the 
war  he  waged  against  it.  Its  propaganda  was  not 
for  a  moment  impeded  ;  it  pursued  the  even  tenor 
of  its  way,  and  was  uninfluenced  in  its  aim  and 
its  ulterior  manifestations. 

Fortune,  ever  capricious,  at  the  sunset  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  placed  upon  the  throne  of  the 
Caesars  a  man  of  brilliant  intelligence,  of  strong  and 
upright  soul.  And,  in  spite  of  all,  his  life  had  no 
effect  whatever!  His  efforts  were  transient  and 
fruitless.  He  was  possessed  of  an  entirely  errone- 
ous idea,  which  influenced  him  to  act  in  a  manner 
that  could  only  lead  to  disaster.  He  went  his  way 
as  a  sleep-walker  who  is  unconscious  of  the  real 
world  around  him.  In  history  there  is  no  sadder 
spectacle  than  this  dissipation  of  great  possibilities, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  none  more  interesting, 
because  the  study  of  the  causes  that  rendered 
possible  the  grov/th  of  such  a  gigantic  illusion  in  a 
mind  otherwise  intelligent  and  clear-seeing,  furnishes 
us  with  the  means  of  understanding  and  gauging,  in 
all  its  importance,  the  religious  revolution  that 
caused  the  ruin  of  ancient  civilisation. 

These  causes  we  have  scrutinised  and  discussed 
in  the  course  of  this  work.  But  it  would  be  well 
for  us  to  review  and  lay  stress  on  them,  because 
they  justify  our  interest  in  Julian's  life,  and  because. 


CONCLUSION 


593 


in  their  analysis,  lies  the  object  of  the  long  and 
patient  study  we  have  undertaken. 

First  of  all,  we  must  endeavour  to  cast  a  com- 
prehensive glance  at  the  whole  picture  of  which 
we  have  examined  the  various  parts.  Christianity 
had  succeeded  in  overcoming  ancient  civilisation, 
because  it  had  offered  to  the  world  two  principles 
entirely  new — principles  which  responded  to  the 
condition  and  necessities  of  the  times.  On  the  one 
hand,  it  offered  monotheism,  which  had  become 
indispensable  to  a  world  for  which  the  ancient 
polytheism  had  become  deprived  of  all  substratum  ; 
on  the  other  hand,  it  offered  a  moral  law  that  was 
in  direct  contrast  with  the  ancient  organisation  of 
society,  which  was  based  on  the  superiority  of 
force  ;  a  law  that  glorified  the  weak  and  the  unfor- 
tunate ;  a  law  that  hoped  to  inaugurate  a  new 
society,  established  on  love  and  the  recognition  of 
human  brotherhood.  But  Christianity,  adopting  as 
its  two  levers  these  two  innovating  principles,  was 
only  able  to  accomplish  the  negative  part  of  its  pro- 
gramme, for,  although  it  shook  from  its  foundations 
and  overturned  the  ancient  civilisation,  it  did  not 
complete  its  positive  part,  so  that  when  it  issued 
victorious  from  the  secular  struggle  that  it  had  so 
heroically  confronted,  it  had  instituted  a  new 
society,  but  one  still  founded  on  the  superiority  of 
force,  of  violence  and  of  injustice,  and  its  divine 
laws  remained  naught  but  luminous  ideals  without 

VOL.  II.  — 18 


594  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


direct  influence  on  the  actions  of  men.  What  was 
the  reason  of  this  strange  phenomenon  ?  How 
was  it  that,  although  the  ancient  evils  had  been 
overthrown  by  a  divine  Gospel,  evils  arose  much 
greater  than  those  which  had  been  fought  and 
overcome  ?  The  cause  of  this  historical  phenome- 
non is  that  the  categorical  imperative  of  a  moral 
law  is  not  to  be  found  beyond  and  above  humanity, 
but  rather  in  it,  in  the  essential  conditions  of  its 
spirit  at  a  given  moment  in  history,  and  as  the 
consequent  necessity  of  its  organisation.  It  is  not 
the  moral  law  that  recreates  society,  it  is  society 
already  recreated  that  imposes  a  moral  law.  Now, 
a  society  is  never  recreated  until  it  recreates  its 
manner  of  comprehending  itself  and  its  conception 
of  the  universe.  As  long  as  there  existed  the 
anthropomorphic  conception  of  the  divinity,  and 
the  anthropocentric  and  geocentric  conceptions  of 
the  universe,  men  might  change  their  appearance, 
but,  in  substance,  they  were  always  equal  to  them- 
selves. Accepting  the  idea  of  a  supernatural  and 
superrational  power,  of  a  transcendent  Being 
possessed  of  absolute  authority,  humanity  would 
always  have  been  able  to  elude  the  laws  that 
weighed  upon  it,  and  render  that  power  subservient 
to  its  passions,  by  forcing  it  to  make  terms,  and  by, 
according  to  exterior  forms,  a  value  that  should  be 
considered  a  sort  of  compensation  fixed  by  contract. 
The  renewal  of  society  could  not  have  taken  place 
until  the  conception  of  a  supernatural  arbiter  was 


CONCLUSION 


595 


exchanged  for  the  conception  of  the  unalterable 
determinism  of  a  natural  system.  It  is  necessary 
that  humanity  should  bring  itself  and  the  universe 
into  conformity  with  truth  before  it  can  organise 
itself  in  harmony  with  law  from  which  it  cannot 
escape.  The  moral  law  created  by  Christ  is  the 
most  sublime  of  all ;  it  is  absolutely  perfect,  but  just 
because  it  was  morally  based  on  truth,  this  law  was 
ineffectual  in  a  world  intellectually  based  on  what 
was  false. 

More  than  half  a  century  after  Christianity  had 
triumphed,  Julian  came  to  the  throne,  and  found 
vice  and  crime  dominant  in  the  Court,  the  Church, 
and  the  clergy,  divided  by  intestine  strife,  and  all 
parts  of  the  Christian  Empire  terribly  corrupt.  He 
deceived  himself  by  supposing  that  he  could  save 
civilisation  and  render  the  world  moral  by  returning 
to  ancient  principles,  and  by  founding  a  sort  of 
Christianised  polytheism.  Julian  cannot,  therefore, 
be  considered  an  enemy  of  the  advance  of  civilisa- 
tion, because,  on  the  one  hand,  he  sought  to  convert 
the  Hellenic  pantheon  into  a  monotheistic  hierarchy, 
and,  on  the  other,  he  recognised  the  virtues  that 
Christianity  might  have  diffused  among  humanity. 
But  neither  can  we  consider  him  as  an  innovator, 
because  he  was  not  able  to  present  to  the  world 
any  new  intellectual  principle  ;  he  only  desired  to 
clothe  the  ancient  forms  in  those  theological  and 
moral  principles  which  Christianity  had  proclaimed 
— those  principles  that  had  given  it  its  victory.  To 


596 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


have  initiated  a  truly  genial  and  fruitful  revolution, 
Julian  should  have  become  the  promoter  of  a 
religion  without  sacrifices  and  without  worship,  and, 
intuitively  divining  the  possibility  of  delivering  the 
world  and  man  from  the  terror  of  an  absolute  and 
transcendent  authority  and  from  the  bonds  of 
superstition,  he  should  have  laid  the  foundation 
of  a  civilisation  based  on  Reason  and  Science. 
But  of  all  this,  Julian  had  not  even  the  faintest 
conception ! 

Christianity,  as  it  appeared  in  Palestine,  in  the 
person  and  the  teachings  of  its  Founder,  was  the 
pure  expression  of  a  moral  sentiment,  an  aspiration 
towards  an  ideal  of  justice,  and  the  meekness 
with  which  it  opposed  itself  to  the  iniquities  of  the 
world  was  a  protest  fulminating  in  its  eloquence. 
The  preachings  of  Jesus,  so  original,  because  of 
the  irresistible  breath  of  poesy  that  animates 
them,  and  because  of  their  simplicity  of  form,  fol- 
lowed in  the  footsteps  of  those  teachings  initiated  by 
the  great  prophets  of  the  Israelitic  decadence,  who 
announced  sanctity  of  life  as  a  sine  qua  non  of  the 
rehabilitation  of  their  race.  According  to  Jesus, 
and  in  this  lies  the  novelty  of  his  Gospel,  holiness 
of  life  consists  in  the  acceptance  of  the  brotherhood 
of  man  before  one  unique  Father,  and,  as  a  natural 
consequence,  in  the  condemnation  of  arrogance  and 
abuse  of  force,  in  the  exaltation  of  the  humble, 
the  suffering,  and  the  downtrodden. 


CONCLUSION 


597 


The  two  truths  inculcated  by  primitive  Chris- 
tian teaching,  owing  to  their  efficacy,  were  able 
to  take  root  even  in  a  soil  to  which  they  were 
apparently  not  adapted,  because  lacking  the  pre- 
paration of  tradition.     The   first  announced  an 
impending  transformation  that  would  change  the 
face  of  the  world  by  punishing  oppressors  and 
uplifting  the  oppressed.    The  second  affirmed  the 
revelation  of  a  divine  Person,  who  had  had  an 
historic  existence,  and  was  a  well-determined  and 
concrete  personality,  upon  the  subject  of  whose 
existence  there  was  no  possible  doubt,  and  in  whom, 
therefore,  one  could  believe  with  a  security  that  could 
no  longer  be  accorded  to  the  exhausted  divinities 
of  the  Hellenic  Olympus.    With  its  first  promise, 
Christianity  quenched  the  thirst  for  justice  that  tor- 
mented a  world  stifled  by  the  abuse  of  might 
considered  as  right,  while  the  revelation  of  this 
divine  Christ  responded  to  the  evident  desire  of 
the  world  to  possess  a  God  in  whom  it  could 
believe,  in  place  of  the  ancient  deities  in  whom  it 
no  longer  had  any  faith.    And  when  it  saw  this 
God  take  upon  himself  all  the  miseries  of  humanity, 
and  die  persecuted   like   the   veriest  slave,  the 
apotheosis    of    misery    was    accomplished,  and 
Christianity  became  the  religion  to  which  flocked 
all  those  who  were  unfortunate. 

Christianity,  therefore,  in  the  early  period  of 
its  existence,  was  a  religion  essentially  moral  and 
wholly  dependent  on  sentiment.    Paul,  it  is  true. 


598 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


as  soon  as  he  became  converted,  sought  to  give 
a  rational  explanation  of  the  process  of  redemption. 
Being,  above  all,  possessed  of  a  strongly  logical 
mind,  Paul  did  not  become  converted  until  this 
process  was  thoroughly  clear  to  him.    But  the 
Pauline  conception,  at  first,  remained  only  as  a 
purely  personal  fact,  and  does  not  seem  to  have 
exercised  an  important  influence  on  the  doctrinal 
evolution  of  Christianity  until  a  long  time  afterwards. 
It  was  the  influence  of  his  personality,  of  his  spirit, 
of  his  will ;  it  was  the  announcement  of  the  impend- 
ing regeneration  of  the  world  by  the  reappearance 
of  Christ,  Saviour  of  the  oppressed,  and  its  good 
tidings,  that  called  to  the  new  doctrine  the  crowd 
of  believers.     For  nearly  a  century  and  a  half 
Christianity  maintained  itself  in  this  atmosphere 
of  simple  faith  without  any  attempt  at  systematic 
doctrine.    Those  who  called  themselves  Christians 
had  but  one  faith  common  to  all,  a  monotheistic 
faith  founded  on  the  revelation  of  God  through 
the  medium  of  Christ,  the  hope  of  an  eternal  life 
guaranteed  by  Christ,  and  a  consciousness  of  the 
obligations  assumed  with  baptism  to  lead  a  life 
in  correspondence  with   the   example   given  by 
Christ.     The  Christian  writings  anterior  to  the 
second  half  of  the  second  century,  in  the  AihaxVy 
the  First  Epistle  of   Clemens  Alexandrinus,  the 
Letters  "  of  Ignatius,  the  writings  of  Papias,  the 
Epistle  of  Barnabas,  prove  the  complete  absence 
of  any  apparent   doctrine  among   the  primitive 


CONCLUSION 


599 


Christians,  whose  only  rule  of  conduct  was  based 
on  a  few  truths,  and,  above  all,  on  certain  promises 
revealed  by  Christ.  These  primitive  Christians 
lived,  with  all  the  strength  of  their  souls,  for  this 
faith,  and  did  not  find  it  necessary  to  represent  it 
by  a  complexity  of  determined  doctrines.  What 
were  the  dogmatics  of  these  Christians  ?  Barnabas 
tells  us  what  they  were.  "  Three  are  the  dogmas 
of  our  Lord,  hope  .  .  justice  .  .  love."  ^  And  at 
the  end  of  this  Epistle,  describing  the  two  paths 
that  lie  open  before  the  believer,  the  way  of  light 
and  the  way  of  darkness,  he  traces  a  programme, 
which  is  nauoht  else  than  a  faithful  echo  of  the 
Evangelical  moral,  and  in  which  there  is  not  even 
the  suspicion  of  a  doctrinal  principle.^ 

We  find  in  the  Octavius  "  of  Minucius  Felix 
a  singularly  interesting  proof  of  the  poverty  of 
philosophical  doctrine  in  genuine  Christianity  even 
as  far  down  as  the  second  half  of  the  second  century. 
I  n  the  time  of  the  Antonines,  and  more  exactly  during 
the  reign  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  at  which  period  this 
Dialogue  was  composed,  Christianity  began  to 
find  recruits  even  among  the  more  cultured  classes 
of  Roman  society.  Minucius  Felix  was  a  lawyer 
of  note,  Ciceronian  in  his  eloquence,  a  classical 
writer,  and  an  erudite  philosopher.  His  defence 
of  Christianity  gives  us,  therefore,  an  exact  idea  of 

^  Barnabas,  op.  cit.^  i.  6.  Tp\a  ovv  doyfJLara  eVrlv  Kvpiov,  cXttl?, 
diKatocrvvT],  dyaTrr]. 

2  /did.,  op.  cit.,  i.  18-21. 


600 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


what  Christianity  meant  to  these  men  of  culture. 
And  we  see  plainly  that  the  Christianity  of  Minucius 
Felix  is  only  an  extremely  simple  and  rational 
monotheistic  deism  which  does  not  contain  the 
slightest  trace  of  a  theological  and  metaphysical 
system,  which  abhors  the  exterior  forms  of  worship, 
and  asserts  that  the  conscience  of  man  is  in  direct 
contact  with  God.       Qui  innocentiam  colit,  deo 
supplicat ;  qui  justitiam,  deo  libat  ;  qui  fraudibus 
abstinet,  propitiat  deum ;   qui  hominem  periculo 
subripit,  deo  optimam  victimam  cedit.    Haec  nostra 
sacrificia,  haec   dei   sacra   sunt.     Sic   apud  nos 
religiosior  est  ille  qui  justior."^    It  was  the  high 
morality  of  Christianity,  it  was  the  rationality  of 
the  monotheistic  idea,  it  was,  in  short,  the  simplicity 
of  worship  that  constituted  the  attraction  of  nascent 
Christianity.    The  positive  character  of  the  Latin 
genius  impeded  the  flowering  of  parasitical  meta- 
physics. 

But,  however,  in  the  Hellenic  world,  Chris- 
tianity could  not  long  retain  this  state  of  dogmatic 
simplicity.  The  Greek  mind  was  wholly  imbued 
with  metaphysical  speculation.  It  was  not,  there- 
fore, possible  that  religion  should  remain 
aloof  from  metaphysics,  because  it  is  an  in- 
stitution in  which  is  represented  the  bond  that 
unites  the  world  to  its  cause.  It  was  destined 
to  become  metaphysical.  Judaism  had  already 
suffered  this  fate,  although,  in  its  origin,  like  the 

1  Minucius  Felix,  Opera^  32,  3. 


CONCLUSION 


601 


religion  of  Mahomet,  it  was  absolutely  impervious 
to  all  philosophical  speculations.  As  soon  as 
Judaism  extended  itself  into  the  Greek  world  by 
means  of  its  colonies,  it  was  obliged  to  succumb 
to  the  modifying  power  of  philosophical  thought, 
and  establish,  on  the  basis  of  the  Philonian  Logos, 
a  true  and  determined  metaphysical  system.  It 
was  in  this  atmosphere  of  Hellenised  Judaism 
that  the  writer  of  the  Gospel  of  John  evolved  the 
identification  of  the  Logos  with  Christ,  and  thereby 
opened  the  door  to  philosophical  speculation  which, 
in  a  short  time,  took  possession  and  made  itself 
master  of  religion.  Gnosticism  was  the  first-fruit 
of  the  union  of  Christianity  and  the  Greek  world. 
Christian  Gnosticism,  which  probably  had  its  root 
in  Hebraic  Gnosticism,  a  degeneration  of  Philonian 
philosophy,  was  a  species  of  premature  Neo- 
Platonism — a  fantastic  and  exuberant  metaphysical 
conception  that  encompassed  the  idea  of  the  Logos 
and  stifled  it  with  its  luxuriant  overgrowth.  In 
Gnosticism,  Christianity  lost  its  character  of  a 
revelation,  of  a  regenerative  principle  of  the  human 
soul,  and  was  transformed  into  a  complicated 
cosmology,  where  the  process  of  creation  resolved 
itself  into  a  divine  dualism,  between  the  two  terms 
of  which  a  hierarchy  of  spirits  and  minor  divinities 
was  introduced — a  hierarchy  in  which  the  Logos 
had  the  first  place,  as  it  was  the  immediate  emana- 
tion of  the  supreme  God. 

We  have  said  that  Christian  Gnosticism  was 


602 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


a  species  of  premature  Neo-Platonism.  This  is 
exact  in  the  sense  that  each  of  these  systems,  by- 
means  of  the  multipHcity  of  divine  emanations, 
recreated  a  real  polytheism  under  the  wing  of  a 
theoretical  monotheism.  But,  notwithstanding  this, 
there  existed  a  profound  antipathy  between  the 
two  systems,  because  Gnosticism,  engrafted  on  the 
trunk  of  Christianity,  adopted  its  pessimistic  con- 
ceptions concerning  the  world.  And  not  being 
able  to  explain  the  creation  of  an  evil  world  by  a 
merciful  God,  it  had  fallen  into  dualism,  and  attri- 
buted to  a  wicked  God  the  creation  of  matter.  The 
process  of  redemption,  perfected  by  the  Logos, 
who  had  descended  on  earth  for  this  purpose, 
consisted  in  the  victory  of  the  good  God  and  the 
consequent  liberation  of  souls  from  their  servitude 
to  matter  and  sin. 

Now,  this  cosmological  system  must  have  been 
most  odious  to  genuine  Neo-Platonism  ;  for  Neo- 
Platonism  the  world  is  most  excellent,  perfect  in  all 
its  parts,  and  represents  a  phase  of  an  evolutionary 
process,  in  which  good  and  evil  have  a  relative  value, 
and  each  its  raison  d'etre — a  process  to  which  the 
idea  of  redemption  is  absolutely  extraneous,  because 
this  idea  of  redemption  implies  the  premise  of  an 
error  or  a  fault  that  Neo-Platonism  fails  to  see 
in  the  world,  and  which  to  it  appears  a  lack  of 
reverence  for  the  conception  of  a  God.  Neo- 
Platonism,  through  Plotinus  himself,  has  openly 
combated  Gnostic  pessimism,  and  it  is  also  possible 


CONCLUSION 


603 


that,  in  this  direction,  it  encountered  Christianity, 
including  it  in  its  polemic  against  Gnosticism/ 

The  apparition  of  Christian  Gnosticism,  which 
threatened  to  bring  back  Christianity  to  polytheism, 
had  the  consequence  of  developing,  as  an  antidote 
to  the  false  doctrine,  an  Orthodox  theology,  which 
served  as  an  instrument  to  repel  the  Gnostic  errors. 
Now,  this  Orthodox  theology,  as  long  as  it  remained 
in  Latin  surroundings,  could  not  extend  its  wings 
to  very  lofty  metaphysical  flights.  Notwithstand- 
ing that  it  assumed,  as  its  first  premise,  the  idea  of 
the  divine  Logos,  it  was  not  the  cosmological 
process,  but  rather  the  process  of  redemption,  that 
constituted  for  it  the  essence  of  religion.  The 
theology  of  Irenseus  and  Tertullian  was  not  inspired 
by  the  creative  Logos,  but  by  the  redeeming  Logos. 
The  Greek  spirit  prevailed,  however,  in  Christianity, 
and  this  raised  Christian  speculation  to  a  height  on 
which  Clemens  Alexandrinus  and  Origen  trans- 
formed it  into  an  immense  system  of  cosmological 
metaphysics,  which  was  only  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  Neo-Platonic  philosophy  that  rose  up 
beside  it,  by  the  presence  of  Christ  the  Redeemer. 

We  are  already  acquainted  with  the  funda- 
mental lines  of  Origen's  conception,  the  consequences 
that  were  derived  from  it,  and  the  development  of 
Christian  thought :  we  have  seen  how  Christianity 
was  transmuted  into  a  luxuriant  system  of  dogmatic 

^  See  about  this  point  the  recent  study  of  Carl  Schmidt, 
Plotiiis  Stellung  zuin  Gnosticismus^  1901. 


604 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


theology,  and  how  the  world  was  agitated  by  a 
whirlwind  of  metaphysical  disputes  in  which  all 
religious  interest  was  completely  exhausted.  Now, 
this  transformation  of  religion  into  science,  or,  to  be 
more  exact,  philosophy,  signified  that  the  necessary 
requisite  for  being  a  Christian  was  no  longer  the 
recognition  of  a  rule  of  moral  conduct  and  the  ineff- 
able aspiration  of  being  united  with  God  the  Father 
as  revealed  by  Christ.  It  was,  on  the  contrary,  the 
recognition  of  a  given  complication  of  philosophical 
dogmas,  and  the  adherence  to  a  certain  given 
system,  doctrinal  and  scholastic.  This  peculiar  and 
essential  transformation  naturally  tended  to  im- 
poverish Christian  morals.  In  the  heroic  times  of 
primitive  Christianity,  to  be  a  Christian  it  was 
necessary  to  practise  certain  virtues,  as  indicated 
by  Octavius  in  the  Dialogue  of  Minucius  Felix ;  in 
the  third  and  fourth  centuries  it  was  necessary  to 
profess  a  determined  doctrine.  The  wicked  Con- 
stantine,  who  had  committed  every  crime,  and  had 
murdered  his  son  and  his  wife,  was,  in  the  eyes  of 
the  great  Athanasius,  an  emperor  to  be  venerated 
because  he  had  called  together  the  Council  of 
Nicsea  and  had  sustained  the  Homoousian  formula. 
In  the  theological  struggle  that  for  three  centuries 
agitated  and  divided  the  Church,  both  contending 
parties  only  demanded  one  thing  of  a  Christian,  viz., 
the  profession  of  a  doctrine. ,  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas,  and  the  Jchaxv  had 
been  superseded  by  those  dogmatic  formulas  that 


CONCLUSION 


605 


the  Councils  hurled  one  against  the  other,  and 
which  were  upheld  by  the  partisans  of  the  opposing 
doctrines.  When  Christianity,  in  this  condition  of 
affairs,  became  Hellenised  intellectually,  it  aban- 
doned its  primitive  ideas  of  morality,  and  these 
were  so  completely  forgotten  that  when,  in  the 
midst  of  the  theological  edifice,  they  desired  to 
recreate  a  system  of  morals,  they  did  not  return  to 
the  Gospels,  or  even  to  Paul,  but  revived  the 
traditions  of  Greek  and  Latin  Stoicism.  Even 
Ambrose,  in  his  book  De  Officiis,  merely  copied 
the  work  of  Cicero,  which,  in  its  turn,  was  only  a 
revival  of  the  treatise  by  the  Stoic  Panaetius.  But 
all  redeeming  efficacy  in  this  Christianity  must 
necessarily  have  become  extinguished,  when  intel- 
lectually it  lost  itself  in  the  arid  desert  of  meta- 
physics, and  morally  abandoned  the  living  principle 
of  love  and  brotherhood,  to  replace  on  its  pedestal 
the  marble  image  of  a  virtue  nourished  on  the 
abstract  idea  of  duty.  It  became  a  religion  of 
formalities,  and,  what  is  worse,  a  religion  that  no 
longer  based  its  hopes  of  salvation  on  the  renew^al 
of  the  inner  man,  as  Paul  had  taught,  but  rather 
on  its  recognition  of  exterior  manifestations, 
doctrinal  as  well  as  ritual,  and  transmuted  into  a 
complicated  superstition  that  luminous  aspiration 
towards  the  ideal  which  it  had  affirmed  at  its  birth. 

But  Christianity  could  not  lose  entirely  its 
moralising  efficacy,  which  had  been  the  cause  of  its 
first  victories  and  its  raison  d'etre.    The  trans- 


606 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


formation  of  the  Church  into  an  intellectual  or- 
ganisation, that  only  required  the  profession  of 
a  determined  doctrine,  brought  with  it  the  natural 
consequence  of  the  secession  of  those  spirits  who 
sought  something  more  in  their  creed,  and  were 
loth  to  content  themselves  with  the  mundane 
opportunism  of  an  official  religion.  All  these 
retired  from  the  world  and  social  intercourse,  and 
originated  monachal  asceticism,  to  which  we  have 
already  alluded,  and  this  was  the  refuge  that 
sheltered  those  ideal  aspirations  that  Christianity 
had  spread  abroad  in  the  world. 

This  then  was  the  spectacle  offered  by  Christian 
society  in  the  second  half  of  the  fourth  century, 
when  the  consequences  arising  from  Constantine's 
recognition  of  Christianity  as  an  approved  religion 
had  already  become  evident.  Christianity  became 
perverted  in  order  to  adapt  itself  to  the  exigencies 
of  a  society  of  which  it  formed  an  essential 
element  of  organisation.  The  most  lofty  ideals 
which  it  had  revealed  to  the  world,  absolutely 
inapplicable  to  the  real  life  of  the  times,  disappeared 
in  the  isolation  of  the  convents,  and  Christianity 
only  seemed,  to  those  outside  the  pale,  as  a  destruc- 
tive force  that,  destroying  all  the  traditions  of 
patriotism  and  culture  on  which  the  ancient  civilisa- 
tion had  been  founded,  rendered  its  ruin  inevitable. 
And  when  this  Imperial  philosopher,  the  only 
surviving  member  of  the  family  of  Constantine, 


CONCLUSION 


607 


ascended  the  throne  of  the  Caesars,  it  was  from 
this  point  of  view  that  he  regarded  Christianity. 
Wholly  devoted  to  Hellenic  civilisation,  he  wished 
to  prevent  its  destruction,  and  he  considered  it  his 
supreme  duty  to  defend  it  from  the  perils  by  which 
it  was  encompassed.  For  this  reason  he  hated 
Christianity,  which,  it  is  true,  desired  the  usufruct 
of  the  Hellenic  heritage,  wishing  to  speak  and 
write  according  to  its  teachings,  but,  in  reality, 
disorganised  Hellenism  and  deprived  it  of  all  force 
of  resistance. 

As  a  thinker,  educated  in  the  Neo-Platonic  schools, 
Julian  found  the  doctrines  of  Plotinus  and  Porphyry, 
and,  still  further  back,  that  of  Plato,  preferable  to 
the  doctrines  of  Origen  and  Athanasius,  consider- 
ing them  only  as  the  corruption  of  the  source  from 
which  they  were  drawn.  As  a  severe  moralist,  he 
was  disgusted  at  the  degeneration  of  the  Christian 
Church  as  soon  as  it  arrived  at  the  dignity  of  a 
recognised  religion.  All  passions  and  all  vices  had 
there  a  free  scope.  Neither  the  Imperial  Court 
nor  the  great  cities  of  the  Empire  were  moralised 
by  their  conversion  to  Christianity.  The  most 
Christian  Antioch  offered  Julian  a  scandalous 
display.  He  could  not  conceal  his  astonishment 
and  anger,  so  he  became  most  antipathetic  to  the 
Antiochians,  who  more  easily  forgave  his  hatred 
of  their  religion  than  his  scathing  criticism  of  their 
customs. 

In  this  condition  of  affairs  it  seemed  to  Julian 


608 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


that  it  was  his  duty  to  restore  the  ancient  civilisa- 
tion— Hellenism,  as  he  called  it — and  he  thought 
he  would  be  able  to  do  so  by  reconstructing 
polytheism  and  by  directing  towards  it  the  current 
of  popular  sentiments  and  customs.  But  he  knew 
that  it  would  be  impossible  to  accomplish  his 
intention  unless,  at  the  same  time,  he  initiated  the 
reformation  of  polytheism.  The  naturalistic  and 
national  gods  of  the  Graeco- Latin  Olympus  were 
completely  exhausted,  and  no  one  believed  in  their 
existence.  Julian,  as  we  have  seen,  tried  to  preserve 
them  by  transforming  them  into  certain  symbolical 
expressions  grouped  around  one  unique  and  divine 
principle,  which,  in  its  turn,  was  represented  by  the 
sun,  who  was,  for  Julian,  the  king  of  the  universe. 
In  this,  he  was  only  a  Neo-Platonist,  a  follower  of 
lamblichus  rather  than  of  Plotinus,  and  by  no 
means  an  innovator.  But  that  which  is  really 
original  and  interesting  is  that  Julian,  in  the  revival 
of  Hellenism,  saw  the  victory  of  a  lofty  principle 
of  morality  and  virtue.  Julian  was  a  man  pre- 
eminently virtuous,  austere,  above  all  mundane 
pleasures,  an  idealist  by  nature  and  education. 
Now,  he  completely  excluded  the  possibility  of 
Christianity  being  a  factor  of  morality.  With  the 
exception  of  the  principle  that  inculcated  the 
giving  of  alms  to  the  poor,  in  which  he  had 
strongly  admonished  his  followers  to  imitate  the 
Galileans,  Julian  did  not  recognise  that  the  Christians 
gave  proof  of  any  virtues.    And,  especially  in  its 


CONCLUSION 


609 


highest  sphere,  among  the  bishops  themselves,  he 
only  saw  avidity  of  gain,  ambition,  furious  disputes, 
incontinence,  and  violence.  Now,  he  wished  to 
introduce  into  the  practical  every-day  life  those 
virtues  that  worldly  Christianity  forced  to  take 
refuge  in  the  convents.  This  was  really  the  key- 
note of  Julian's  attempt.  Christianity  had  not 
made  the  world  moral,  and  he  believed  that  he 
could  do  that  by  reviving  Hellenism,  which,  for  him, 
was  the  sitmmum  of  wisdom,  beauty,  and  justice. 

To  accomplish  this,  Julian  wished  to  lead  the 
world  back  to  polytheism,  but  to  a  polytheism 
essentially  reformed.  The  religion  of  the  antique 
world  was  nauo^ht  else  than  a  function  of  the  State. 
A  conflict,  a  discord,  a  separation  between  religion 
and  the  State  was  inconceivable ;  religion  was 
necessarily  the  handmaiden  of  the  State,  because 
it  was  the  needful  instrument,  the  indispensable 
element  of  its  preservation.  Persecuted  Christianity 
gave  to  the  world  the  conception  of  a  religion  that 
established  itself  as  a  power  independent  of  the 
State.  But  as  soon  as  it  was  recognised  as  a 
religion  admitted  by  the  Empire,  it  revealed  its 
tendency  to  overrule  the  State,  and,  by  inverting 
their  relative  positions,  made  religion,  organised  and 
disciplined  by  the  Church,  the  dominating  power 
of  a  subservient  State. 

Julian,  however, — and  this  is  one  of  the  most 
singular  features  of  his  attempt, — desiring  to  make 
his  religion  a  moralising  institution,  also  wished 

VOL.  II. — 19 


610  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


to  separate  it  from  the  State ;  he  therefore 
attempted  to  organise  a  true  and  proper  polytheistic 
Church,  which  would  be  the  ideal,  and  example 
of  doctrine  and  virtue.  We  have  noticed,  in 
the  analysis  of  the  instructions  given  by  Julian 
to  important  personages  of  his  Church,  that  its 
organisation  formed  one  of  his  principal  preoccu- 
pations, and  that  no  detail  concerning  it  was  too 
small  or  insignificant  to  escape  his  notice.  We 
also  noted  that,  for  purity  of  intention  and  for  the 
nature  of  the  advice  that  he  gave  to  his  priests  in 
relation  to  their  conduct  and  habits,  his  letters 
might  be  considered  as  the  Pastorals "  of  some 
Christian  bishop,  inspired  by  early  Christian 
ideals,  and  the  effect  they  produce  is  most 
peculiar,  as  they  are,  at  times,  a  genuine  echo 
of  that  Gospel  which  Julian  so  cordially  despised. 
The  Emperor  wished,  in  fact,  to  found  his 
polytheistic  Church  on  a  basis  of  holiness,  so  that 
there  would  emanate  from  it  a  breath  of  moral 
purification.  And  to  succeed  in  this,  in  the 
enthusiasm  of  his  propaganda,  he  tilted  against 
the  prevailing  habits  and  customs  of  his  time. 
Julian  was  a  polytheistic  Puritan.  To  attempt  this 
union  of  Puritanism  and  polytheism  was  an  idea 
only  possible  to  a- dreamer  educated  in  the  mysticism 
of  the  Neo-Platonic  sect.  The  world  rebelled  at 
this  strange  attempt  to  impose  on  it  a  severe 
morality  in  the  name  of  Bacchus  and  Apollo,  trans- 
muted into  symbols  of  mystical  and  philosophical 


CONCLUSION 


611 


conceptions.  Society,  which  in  so  short  a  time  had 
been  able  to  corrupt  Christianity,  was,  by  no  means, 
disposed  to  allow  itself  to  be  corrected  and  dis- 
ciplined by  this  reformed  polytheism.  Possibly  a 
return  to  the  joyous  and  free  religion  of  genuine 
Hellenism  might  have  been  understood.  But 
Julian,  with  his  tedious  and  severe  worship, 
despoiled  polytheism  of  its  principal  charm,  its 
supreme  fascination,  and  with  the  exception  of  the 
initiated  few  who  surrounded  him,  he  only  met  with 
indifference  and  mockery.  It  is  easy  to  understand 
his  intentions.  He  wished  to  retain  the  ancient 
civilisation  that  was  gradually  falling  to  pieces  by 
the  dissolving  action  of  Christianity,  which  deprived 
it  of  its  traditions,  its  ideals,  its  beliefs — in  a  word, 
of  all  that  complication  of  principles  and  sentiments 
which  is  the  efficient  cause  of  a  civilisation.  But, 
at  the  same  time,  he  felt  that  Christianity  had  so 
effectively  insinuated  itself  into  all  the  pores,  if 
we  may  so  express  it,  of  the  social  and  individual 
organism,  that  the  return  to  the  ancient  cult  would 
be  almost  impossible,  so  he  devoted  himself  to  the 
enterprise,  not  less  impossible,  of  Christianising 
society  and  religion,  without  allowing  them  to 
become  Christian.  He  saw  that  Christianity  in  its 
metaphysics,  and  in  the  exterior  forms  of  its  cult, 
had  so  nearly  approached  polytheism,  and  was  so 
profoundly  modified  through  the  influence  of  Neo- 
Platonism  and  the  Mysteries  as  to  appear  almost  its 
duplicate,  and  he  believed  he  would  be  able  to 


612  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


abolish  it,  by  putting  in  its  place  the  philosophy 
of  Plotinus  and  lamblichus,  and  the  rites  of  the 
Mysteries,  to  which  this  philosophy  served  as  a 
basis,  adding  as  a  cement  to  hold  the  edifice 
together,  the  institution  of  a  sacerdotal  hierarchy, 
in  which  he  would  reproduce,  but  with  a  greater 
purity  of  life,  the  hierarchy  of  the  Christian  Church. 
By  means  of  this  the  young  enthusiast  deluded 
himself,  imagining  he  could  save  Hellenism,  with 
its  civilisation,  its  glories,  its  traditions,  its  poesy, 
and  its  arts !  ! 

Julian  did  not  understand  that  his  reformed 
polytheism  lacked  the  real  power  of  Chris- 
tianity, which  enabled  it  to  keep  alive,  and  to 
become  more  and  more  powerful,  even  when  its 
official  recognition  and  its  transformation  into  a 
function  of  the  State  deprived  it  entirely  of  that 
character  of  protest  against  the  iniquities  of  the 
world,  which  had  been  the  genuine  cause  of  the 
fascination  it  had  exercised  at  its  first  appearance. 
The  world  felt  the  necessity  of  believing  in  a  God  ; 
it  was  not  possible  for  it  to  content  itself  with 
goblins,  with  symbols,  with  metaphysical  phantoms  ; 
it  needed,  if  we  may  so  express  it,  an  historical  God 
as  an  image,  a  representative,  a  guarantee  of  the 
supreme  Power  that  rules  the  universe.  If  the 
God  of  the  Jews  had  not  been  a  God  exclusively 
national,  and,  besides,  if  there  had  not  been  the  in- 
superable obstacle  of  circumcision,  perhaps  the  world 
would  have  been  converted  to  him,  and  Jesus  would 


CONCLUSION 


613 


have  been  the  real  Messiah  of  Jahveh.    As  this  was 
not  possible,  the  Hebraic  God,  in  order  to  be  accepted 
in  the  West,  was  obliged  to  be  Hellenised,  by 
placing  beside  him  a  revealer,  who  became  at  the 
same  time  a  son,  and  an  intermediary  between 
him  and  the  world.    The  great  force  of  Christianity 
is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  reality  of  this 
proceeding  was  assured  and  guaranteed  by  the 
historical  objectivity  of  the  personality  of  Jesus. 
Jesus  was,  for  the  world,  this  representation,  divine, 
determined,  precise,  and,  above  all,  most  lovable, 
and   concerning  whose   existence   there  was  no 
possible  doubt.    The  ship  of  faith,  after  having 
breasted  the  angry  billows,  raised  by  the  contending 
systems  of  philosophy,  had  at  last  found  its  haven 
of  rest  in  which  it  could  safely  anchor.  Notwith- 
standing the  theological  cloak  that  hampered  and 
concealed  the  divine  figure,  notwithstanding  the 
abasement  that  the  passions,  the  prejudices,  and  the 
errors  of  man  had  wrought  in  the  essential  principles 
of  his  doctrines,  this  God  was  always  there,  living, 
and  exercising  over  the  souls  his  irresistible  attrac- 
tion.   Compare  the  hymns  overflowing  with  love 
that  Augustine,  in  his  Confessions,  raised  on  high 
to  God,  and  Julian's  invocations  to  the  Sun  and 
the  Mother  of  the  Gods,  and  we  shall  immediately 
be  convinced  that  the  Christian  was  animated  by  a 
true  and  deep-seated  sentiment,  while  the  pagan 
needed  an  overpowering  incentive  of  reason  to 
arouse  in  him  a  fictitious  enthusiasm.    In  the  same 


614  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 

manner,  we  have  already  seen  that  Julian  was 
greatly  exasperated  by  the  worship  which  the 
Christians  rendered  to  the  tombs  of  the  saints  and 
martyrs.  But  it  is  very  natural  that  the  memory 
of  those  who  sacrificed  themselves  for  their  faith 
should  excite  a  special  ardour  in  the  members  of 
this  faith,  and  elevate  it  to  the  ideal  just  because  it 
was  founded  on  a  positive  reality.  Before  these 
images,  before  the  Christ  who  had  lived  in  a 
certain  given  moment  of  history,  and  who  had 
revealed  divine  promises  in  a  language  human  and 
comprehensible  to  all,  what  possible  efficacy  could 
be  found  in  those  pallid  and  confused  phantoms 
which  Julian  had  evoked  from  the  gloomy  sanctuaries 
of  the  Mysteries  and  from  the  mystical  lucubrations 
of  the  Neo-Platonic  philosophers  .-^  If  Julian  had 
possessed  a  truly  religious  spirit,  a  spirit  which  was 
really  pervaded  with  a  thirst  for  the  divine,  he 
would  immediately  have  felt  the  duel  that  he 
had  promoted  between  the  sun-god  and  the  Christ 
would  be  fatal  to  his  astral  deity.  It  would  be 
obliged  to  cede  the  field  and  vanish  before  the  God- 
Man  who  confronted  him  in  the  plenitude  of  His 
reality. 

Julian,  who  was  a  true  Neo-Platonist,  neither 
comprehended  nor  appreciated  what  was  the  real 
strength  of  Christianity,  what  was  the  essential 
cause  that  gave  it  such  a  marvellous  victory  over 
the  powers  of  the  world.  This  strength  and  this 
cause  were  to  be  found  in  the  principle  of  redemp- 


CONCLUSION 


615 


tion,  of  which  Christianity  was  the  welcome 
messenger.  Christianity  was  a  pessimistic  religion, 
because  it  announced  evil  as  a  fact  inherent  in  the 
world  and  humanity ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  held 
out  to  man  the  possibility  of  redemption,  which  was 
to  be  achieved  by  raising  his  thoughts,  hopes,  and 
aspirations  from  the  wickedness  of  the  earth  to  the 
justice,  pardon,  and  felicity  of  heaven.  A  religion 
cannot  have  a  strong  influence  on  the  human  soul 
if  it  is  not  the  fruit  of  a  pessimistic  conception. 
When  the  world  appears  evil,  the  human  souls 
turn  passionately  towards  the  promise  of  happiness 
beyond  the  tomb.  Faith  in  this  promise  inspires 
devotion,  heroism,  and  the  entire  abandonment  of 
self  to  the  joy  of  sacrifice  and  the  ascetic  rapture 
of  divine  love.  An  optimistic  conception  destroys 
religion  ;  it  severs  its  most  deep-seated  roots,  and 
reduces  it  to  festive  ceremonies  and  formal  rites 
entirely  devoid  of  soul.  Certainly,  a  sublime 
thinker,  such  as  Plotinus,  could,  through  the 
contemplation  of  a  perfect  universe,  raise  him- 
self to  a  rapturous  vision  of  God,  but  the  mul- 
titude is  unable  to  follow  him,  and  remains 
bound  down  by  the  preoccupations  of  a  cheerful 
worldliness. 

Julian  could  not  understand  that  Christianity 
was  strong  because  it  was  the  religion  of  the  un- 
happy, the  religion  of  misfortune  and  repentance  ; 
he  was  unable  to  penetrate  into  the  conception 
of  redemption,  which  was  its  corner-stone.  The 


616  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


Logos  Christ  might  find  a  rival  in  the  symbolic 
deities  of  Neo-Platonism,  but  Christ  the  Redeemer 
conquered  everywhere  and  everything,  and,  with  a 
power  that  none  could  withstand,  he  drew  away 
with  him  the  souls  who  were  thirsting  for  a  moral 
palingenesia. 

Julian  was  not  a  reactionary,  as  some,  judging 
from  false  appearances,  might  consider  him.  Julian 
desired  the  preservation  of  polytheism,  because  he 
saw  in  it  the  balm  that  might  save  Hellenism  ;  but 
he  did  not  want  the  polytheism,  with  its  naturalistic 
conceptions  and  its  national  forms,  of  an  epoch  which 
had  for  ever  disappeared.  He  intended  to  reform  and 
reorganise  it  according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  new 
era.  But  if  Julian  was  not  a  reactionary,  he  was 
certainly  the  absolute  living  antithesis  of  what  to-day 
is  called  a  free-thinker.  In  this  he  was  truly  a  man 
of  his  time.  He  had  a  taste  for  metaphysical  specu- 
lations, but  his  mind  was  the  negation  of  all  that 
is  scientific.  He,  more  than  any  one  else,  recognised 
the  necessity  for  a  continual  and  direct  intervention 
of  the  deity  in  every  phenomenon  of  nature  and  in 
every  event  of  life.  The  pagan  superstition  which 
he  restored  to  a  position  of  honour  was  even  more 
impossible  and  obscure  than  Christian  superstition. 
Perhaps,  if,  by  an  unlikely  hypothesis,  Julians 
polytheism  had  been  victorious,  it  would  have  been 
less  fatal  to  science  than  Christian  monotheism, 
because  the  polytheistic  theocracy  would  never  have 


CONCLUSION 


617 


been  so  rigid  as  the  orthodox  theocracy  which  for 
centuries  has  hampered  the  world  and  obstructed 
human  thought.  But  certainly  it  never  entered  into 
Julian's  calculations  to  promote  liberty  of  thought. 
Neither  Julian  nor  his  Neo-Platonic  teachers  had 
the  slightest  intuition  of  what  science  was.  Julian 
was  not  inspired  either  by  Epicurus  or  Lucretius,  or 
even  Aristotle.  Rationalism  served  Julian,  as  it  had 
formerly  served  Plato  and  Plotinus,  and  would  later 
serve  St.  Augustine  and  St.  Thomas,  as  an  affirma- 
tion of  the  superrational  and  the  supernatural, 
and  as  a  means  of  imprisoning  in  its  affirmation  the 
thought  of  mankind,  without  allowing  it  a  possible 
escape  to  examine  the  world  and  become  cognisant 
of  reality.  But  ancient  civilisation  declined  and 
became  extinguished  in  Neo-Platonism,  as  well  as 
in  Christianity,  when  it  refused  to  acknowledge 
reason.  There  only  remained  man  on  earth,  with 
his  passions,  the  transcendent  in  heaven  with  its 
inaccessibility ;  between  these  two  extremes,  an 
impenetrable  obscurity. 

Considered  in  this  light,  Julian's  attempt  appears 
to  lack  all  the  charm  of  novelty.  Julian  was  not 
an  inventive  q-enius.  He  imaq-ined  he  could  save 
ancient  civilisation  by  keeping  intact  all  the  pomp 
of  the  religious  institutions  that  had  accompanied 
its  development,  and  in  which  were  concentrated  so 
many  of  its  memories,  its  traditions,  and  its  customs. 
But  he  did  not  appreciate  the  fact  that,  although 
Christianity  hastened  its  dissolution,  this  ancient 


618  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


civilisation  would  naturally  have  disappeared  in  the 
course  of  events,  because  it  lacked  the  essential 
principles  of  progress,  and  thus  could  not  arrest  the 
dissolvent  action  of  time  :  it  had  become  decrepit, 
it  had  lost  all  vital  force,  and  was  unable  to  resist 
the  victorious  onslaught  of  youthful  and  aggressive 
barbarism. 

The  essential  principle  of  progress  is  science, 
not  the  science  of  hypotheses  and  fantastic  meta- 
physical conceptions,  but  objective  science,  which 
discovers  and  follows  the  rational  process  by  which 
the  phenomenalism  of  nature  is  determined.  Man, 
by  means  of  his  faculty  of  abstraction,  ideally 
recreates  in  his  thoughts  the  universe,  representing 
it  by  a  series  of  causes  and  effects  that  develop  in 
space  and  in  time.  And  in  such  an  ideal  repre- 
sentation is  determined  the  life  of  the  individual 
and  of  society.  Now,  when  this  representation  is 
illusory  and  fallacious — and  it  cannot  be  otherwise 
when  it  is  the  fruit  of  a  reason  that  feeds  on  itself 
— its  result  is  a  determination  of  life  which  is  absurd 
and  incapable  of  improvement,  that  is  to  say,  of  pro- 
gress, because,  without  conscious  objectivity,  truth 
remains  hidden.  The  anthropocentric  conception 
of  the  universe  and  the  anthropomorphic  conception 
of  the  divinity,  imagined  as  a  power  placed  above 
and  beyond  humanity  and  nature,  which  it  rules 
with  an  absolute  authority,  arise  from  an  illusion  of 
the  human  mind,  and  immobilise  life  in  a  net- 
work of  errors  in  which   it  becomes  more  and 


CONCLUSION 


619 


more  entancrled  as  it  endeavours  to  extricate 
itself. 

To  attempt  to  introduce  into  this  fundamental 
error  of  conception  a  just  and  true  moral  principle 
is  absolutely  useless,  because  the  falsity  of  the  con- 
ception in  which  the  human  mind  is  living,  renders 
its  application  impossible,  and  sterilises  and  corrupts 
it.  When  we  imag^ine  that  the  world  is  oroverned 
by  a  God  made  in  the  likeness  of  man,  a  God  who 
can  be  bribed  by  prayers  and  homage  and  offerings, 
the  human  passions  that  long  to  be  satisfied 
immediately  seek  to  find  liberty  of  movement  in  a 
religion  of  forms  that  enables  man  to  obtain  from 
God  the  desired  impunity.  Of  this,  Christianity 
has  given  the  most  marvellous  proof.  The  Gospel 
had  really  been  Good  Tidings;  Jesus  had  come, 
to  reveal  the  sublime  principle  of  brotherly  lov'e 
and  human  solidarity,  the  only  fount  from  which 
the  effective  moral  regeneration  of  the  world 
could  spring.  But  this  fount  was  at  once  clogged. 
The  world  has  not  been  moralised  by  Christianity, 
which,  because  of  its  erroneous  metaphysical  con- 
ceptions of  the  universe  and  of  divinity,  soon 
became  a  reliorion  of  external  forms  and  fantastic 
doctrines  imposed  as  absolute  truths — a  religion 
that,  in  the  actions  of  its  omnipotent  hierarchy,  had 
become  the  negation  of  itself,  and  has  imposed  on 
the  world  that  society,  brutal,  savage,  and  terribly 
passionate,  of  which  the  Divina  Commedia  and  the 
tragedies  of  Shakespeare  present  the  living  image. 


620 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


When  Giacomo  Leopardi,  as  yet  only  a  youth, 
in  the  solitude  of  his  native  village,  buried  himself 
with  a  tragic  abandonment  in  the  immensity  of  his 
thoughts,  he  discovered  in  reason  the  cause  of 
social  disorder,  and  rendered  it  responsible  for 
human  unhappiness.  From  reason,  from  reason 
alone,  came  all  the  evils  in  the  midst  of  which 
man,  separating  himself  from  Nature,  was  lost,  and 
became  entangled  as  in  a  net  from  which  he  could 
not  liberate  himself.  Leopardi  found  in  this,  his 
conviction,  the  confirmation  of  the  Biblical  myth 
concerning  the  fall  of  man.  It  was  the  use  and 
the  abuse  of  reason  that  alienated  man  from  the 
state  of  nature.  In  this  state  he  was  guided  by 
instinct,  an  infallible  guide,  because  limited  to  the 
reality  of  phenomena  ;  when  reason  appears,  instinct 
gives  way  to  reason,  to  reason  which  is  nourished 
on  errors  and  phantoms,  and  imagines  a  world 
that  does  not  correspond  with  the  truth.  And  it 
is  supremely  interesting  to  see  how  Leopardi,  scruti- 
nising, with  a  singular  acuteness  of  observation, 
the  problem  of  human  destiny,  finds  in  his  system 
the  explanation  of  Christianity  and  the  victory 
it  had  gained.  When  men  arrived  at  a  certain 
stage  of  culture  and  civilisation,  reason  became  no 
longer  sufficient  to  itself,  because  it  disordered  and 
destroyed  with  its  own  hands  those  illusions  which 
it  had  created,  and  which  were  indispensable  in 
order  to  render  life  tolerable  to  man.  Humanity, 
therefore,  would  have  rushed  to  its  ruin  if  there  had 


CONCLUSION 


621 


not  appeared  a  divine  revelation  which,  beyond 
and  above  reason,  guaranteed  to  man  the  existence 
of  an  ideal  world,  without  the  certainty  of  which 
the  human  structure,  because  of  the  irreparable 
errors  of  reason,  would  have  crumbled  to  pieces 
like  an  edifice  without  cement. 

But,  concealed  under  this  theory  of  the  thinker 
of  Recanati,  there  is  always  the  sentiment  of 
Nihilism,  the  sentiment  of  the  infinita  vanita  del 
Tutto.  The  ideal  world,  guaranteed  by  revelation, 
is  only  a  world  of  necessary  illusions.  From  this 
arose  the  despairing  attitude  of  the  unhappy  poet, 
who,  recognising  the  errors  of  reason,  saw  no  other 
means  of  salvation  than  in  an  illusion  of  which  he 
himself  demonstrated  the  vanity,  while  affirming  it. 

Now,  Leopardi  was  right  when  he  attributed  to 
reason  the  cause  of  the  errors  and  evils  of  humanity, 
because  it  created  an  ideal  world  based  on  that 
which  is  false.  Animal  communities  are  infallible, 
because,  in  the  exercise  of  their  functions,  they  are 
guided  by  an  infallible  instinct.  But  human 
society,  till  controlled  by  reason,  will,  by  erroneous 
and  illusory  interpretations  of  reality,  only  be 
able  to  organise  itself  in  violence,  crime,  and 
misfortune. 

Tantum  religio  potuit  suadere  malorum ! 

is  a  line  that  is  not  only  applicable  to  the  sacrifice 
of  Iphigenia. 

But  Leopardi  does  not  seem  to  understand  that 


622  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


if  reason,  with  its  premature  and  arbitrary  abstrac- 
tions, has  the  unfortunate  faculty  of  attributing  to 
the  organism  of  the  Whole  arbitrary  and  fallacious 
causes  from  which  arise  a  human  organisation 
based  on  error,  it  also  possesses  the  faculty  of 
correcting  itself  so  that,  little  by  little,  in  the 
explanation  of  the  universe,  reason  substitutes  a 
conception  of  law  for  a  conception  of  force,  and,  at 
the  same  time,  divests  the  deity  of  the  anthropo- 
morphic covering  for  which  it  alone  was  responsible, 
and  man  of  his  anthropocentric  prejudices,  which 
are  also  its  gift.  The  universe  is  a  rational  fact. 
But  reason,  even  from  its  beginnings,  although  it 
made  every  effort,  was  unable  to  explain  it  ration- 
ally, so  it  idealised  it,  and  made  it  an  irrational 
illusion.  Now,  it  is  not  in  the  renunciation  of 
reason  and  in  the  persistency  of  the  irrational  that 
we  can  place  the  salvation  of  the  world  and 
humanity.  The  whole  history  of  human  progress 
proves  that  this  salvation  lies  in  truth  alone,  and 
in  the  ever-increasing  light  of  an  ideality  that 
rationally  represents  and  symbolises  it. 

It  was  scientific  thought  that  gave  a  new 
direction  to  the  ship  of  humanity.  The  day  in 
which  this  movement  towards  a  new  horizon  was 
begun  does  not  coincide  with  the  day  in  which 
Christianity  offered  to  the  world  a  new  moral 
principle,  perfect  and  sublime  though  it  was,  but 
rather  with  the  day  in  which  reason  began  to  rend 


CONCLUSION 


623 


asunder  the  dogmatic  veil  that  obscured  reality 
and  to  observe  and  experiment  on  its  objective 
consistency.  Copernicus,  Kepler,  Bacon,  Galileo, 
Newton  were  the  pilots  who  turned  the  ship  from 
the  course  it  had  until  then  pursued.  But  many 
centuries  had  to  pass  before  the  rational  knowledge 
of  truth  became  an  efficacious  factor  in  social 
evolution.  The  great  achievement  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  the  achievement  for  which  we  may 
call  it  par  excelle^tce  the  century  of  innovation,  is 
precisely  that  of  having  established  the  organisation 
of  human  energy  on  the  basis  of  science,  or,  we 
should  rather  say,  on  the  basis  of  truth. 

Civilisation  is  not  a  phenomenon  of  sentiment, 
it  is  an  essentially  intellectual  phenomenon.  Man 
does  not  exercise  virtue,  that  is  to  say,  is  not 
influenced  by  his  respect  and  love  for  his  fellow- 
men,  because  this  respect  and  this  love  are  taught 
or  preached  to  him  ;  for  this  to  be  the  case,  it  is 
necessary  that  the  duties  inherent  in  the  solidarity 
of  humanity  should  be  impressed  on  him,  in  the 
surroundings  in  which  he  lives,  by  a  causal 
determinism  from  which  he  cannot  withdraw. 
We  have  seen  how  man,  recreating  the  world  in 
his  thoughts  before  the  dawn  of  scientific  know- 
ledge, was  only  able  to  recreate,  with  his  imperfect 
faculties,  a  tissue  of  errors,  of  phantoms  and 
fantasies.  And  on  this  ideal  basis,  notwithstand- 
ing its  falsity,  man  organised  society.  Christianity 
had  offered  to  the  world  the  principle  of  human 


624 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


brotherhood,  initiating  among  men  a  soHdarity  that 
should  have  inaugurated  the  reign  of  Justice. 
But  Christianity  did  not  dissipate  the  darkness  in 
which  reason  groped  its  way,  and  thus  left  intact 
this  fallacious  ideal  creation  on  which  was  founded 
the  structure  of  society.  In  regard  to  human 
progress  its  work  was  necessarily  barren,  because 
the  truth  of  the  sentiment  it  had  offered  the  world 
was  sterilised  by  the  intellectual  errors  which  it 
encountered.  In  order  that  the  true  principle  of 
human  solidarity  should  develop  in  safety,  it  is 
necessary  that  the  fundamental  principle  of 
humanity  should  be  truth  ;  it  is  necessary  that 
the  ideal  world  it  creates  in  its  thoughts  should 
be  a  reproduction  of  the  real  world.  The 
office  of  scientific  knowledge  is  to  render  possible 
the  conformableness  of  the  ideal  world  to  the 
real  world.  And  here  a  phenomenon  presents 
itself,  singular  in  appearance,  but  natural  in  its 
essence.  The  moral  principles  proposed  by 
Christianity,  that  were  trampled  upon  during 
the  centuries  in  which  Christianity  ruled  as  a 
religion,  undiscussed  and  undisputable  to-day,  when 
Christianity  has  become  a  religion  controvertible 
and  controverted,  reveal  themselves  as  strong 
and  efficacious.  The  fundamental  virtues  of 
Christianity — charity,  brotherly  love,  a  respect  for 
the  weak — in  those  centuries  of  darkness  took  root, 
here  and  there,  in  some  elect  souls,  sheltered,  perhaps, 
in  the  cells  of  cenobites ;  humanity,  from  time  to 


CONCLUSION 


625 


time,  had  recourse  to  these  virtues  as  a  remedy  for 
its  ills ;  but  violence,  arrogance,  and  cruelty  were 
the  recognised  and  uncontested  rights  of  the 
strong.  To-day  there  is  a  radical  change.  The 
necessity  for  the  virtues  that  Christianity  imposed 
is  felt  even  by  those  who  rebel  against  it,  and  we 
see,  in  the  distance,  the  dawn  of  better  times, 
although  great  masses  of  lowering  clouds  still 
obscure  the  sky,  and  society  is  engaged  in  a  struggle 
where  right  too  often  gives  way  to  might.  In  the 
spiritual  world  there  is  no  phenomenon  more 
wonderful  than  this  stability  of  the  Christian  ideals, 
through  which  the  moral  principles,  proposed  by 
Christianity  nineteen  centuries  ago,  and  which  con- 
stitute its  essence,  have  become  so  powerful  and 
luminous  that  now  it  would  be  impossible  to 
imagine  a  society  not  based  upon  them,  and  it  is 
acknowledged  that  social  progress  is  nothing  else 
than  the  evidence  of  their  application. 

In  ancient  times,  man's  conception  of  the 
universe  was  derived  from  the  metaphysical 
speculations  of  the  great  thinkers  of  Greece. 
The  conception  of  life  professed  by  the  Christian 
was  influenced  by  the  divine  revelation  of  a 
moral  rule.  The  Church  succeeded  in  forcibly 
uniting  these  two  conceptions  in  an  organic 
whole.  This  reunion  was  necessary  for  the 
victory  of  Christianity,  but  in  it  the  moral 
conception  was  sacrificed  to  the  philosophical 
conception,  and  this  produced  a  society  in  which 

VOL.  II. — 20 


626  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


the  moral  ideal  was  trampled  under  foot  by 
those  whose  duty  it  was  to  realise  it.  The 
philosophical  conceptions  of  antiquity  having 
disappeared  before  the  scientific  conceptions  of 
modern  thought,  the  genuine  Christian  ideals 
reappear  in  all  their  force,  and  they  reappear 
just  because  they  contain  the  germs  of  an  eternal 
truth. 

This  Christianisation  of  society,  which  is 
to-day  manifested  by  the  horror  inspired  by  war, 
at  one  time  the  normal  condition  of  humanity, 
and  by  the  high  ideas  of  duty  that  unite  man 
to  his  fellow-men,  so  that  it  develops  the  senti- 
ment of  responsibility  belonging  to  each  indi- 
vidual in  the  solidarity  of  society,  is,  therefore, 
a  phenomenon  that  proceeds  indirectly  from 
the  scientific  turn  that,  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
has  been  taken  by  civilisation.  The  rational 
knowledge  of  reality,  putting  to  flight  errors  and 
phantoms,  enabled  man  to  represent  ideally  in 
his  own  thoughts  a  universe  based  on  truth,  and, 
as  in  this  representation  the  conception  of  the 
interdependence  of  all  manifestations  of  life 
acquire  an  ever-increasing  efficacy,  it  created  a 
condition  of  things  in  which  the  moral  virtues, 
divined  by  primitive  Christianity,  imposed  them- 
selves as  a  moral  duty,  as  a  categorical  imperative 
from  which  it  was  more  and  more  difficult  for 
man  to  withdraw. 

If  antiquity,  besides  its  knowledge  of  organisa- 


CONCLUSION 


627 


tion,  its  poesy,  and  its  arts,  had  possessed  the 
scientific  spirit,  it  would  have  been  able  to  create 
objective  science — the  science  that,  investigating 
the  universe  by  observation  and  experience, 
discovers  the  unalterable  laws  by  which  it  is 
ruled,  and  uses  them  to  enslave  nature  and 
subjugate  it  —  civilisation  would  not  have  been 
retarded ;  the  invasions  of  the  barbarians  would 
have  been  repulsed,  and  the  course  of  civilisa- 
tion, instead  of  making  a  deep,  descending  curve, 
to  ascend  again,  later  on,  to  the  summit  of  modern 
thought,  would  have  followed  an  ever  ascending 
line,  thereby  gaining  a  few  centuries  for  human 
progress.  This  lack  of  scientific  tendency  in 
the  old  civilisation  appears  inexplicable  when  we 
note  the  manifest  inclination  of  the  ancients  in  this 
direction.  The  great  mind  of  Aristotle  proposed 
the  principle  of  the  existence  of  a  law  intrinsic 
in  the  universe,  considered  as  the  product  of  a 
motive  process,  investigate  and  determinable  by 
human  thought.  And  when  we  remember  that 
Euclid  had  already  refined  and  brought  to  a  high 
degree  of  perfection  mathematics,  that  indis- 
pensable instrument  in  natural  research ;  that 
Archimedes  had  discovered  some  of  the  principal 
laws  of  mechanics  and  physics ;  that  Hero  had 
foreseen  the  application  of  steam  as  a  motive 
power ;  that  Hipparchus  and  Ptolemy  had  applied 
calculation  to  the  observation  of  celestial  phe- 
nomena;  that  Galen  had  made  profound  observa- 


628  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


tions  on  anatomy  and  physiology,  —  we  must 
recognise  that  ancient  thought,  after  having 
arrived  at  the  threshold  of  objective  knowledge, 
hesitated  and  was  unable  to  enter  its  sanc- 
tuary. The  cause  of  this  fatal  hesitation,  which, 
by  depriving  ancient  society  of  the  possibility 
of  recreating  itself  and  progressing,  condemned 
it  to  an  inevitable  decadence,  should,  we  believe, 
be  sought  in  the  organisation  of  that  society 
which  was  based  essentially  on  servitude.  The 
machinery  of  the  ancient  world  was  fed  by  the 
material  force  of  man,  uselessly  wasted  in  a  work 
also  servile.  From  this  arose  the  consequence 
that  labour  being  imposed  on,  and  not  beneficial 
to,  those  who  produced  it,  the  natural  impulse 
to  obtain  increasingly  fruitful  results  was  totally 
lacking.  Everything  remained  enclosed  and 
petrified  in  given  forms,  which  contained  no 
germs  of  continual  and  vital  transformations. 
Science  furnishes  labour  with  the  means  of 
progress ;  but  labour,  when  it  employs  these 
means,  reacts,  in  its  turn,  on  science,  urges  it 
on  to  benefit  by  experience,  and  incites  it  to 
wrest  from  its  discoveries  all  their  latent  possi- 
bilities. The  inequality  of  human  rights,  and 
the  consequent  lack  of  freedom  of  labour,  barred 
the  roads  that  human  activity  was  destined 
to  tread,  and  so  a  precious  force  was  lost, 
which,  if  it  had  been  permitted  to  develop  itself 
freely,     would     have    transformed     the  world 


CONCLUSION 


629 


and  enabled  ancient  civilisation  to  participate  in 
that  continual  augmentation  of  the  possibilities 
of  mastering  nature,  that  is  to  say,  the  possi- 
bilities of  progress.  Ancient  societies  were 
exclusively  based  on  the  strength  of  their  natural 
dispositions ;  but  these  natural  dispositions  were 
corrupted  by  victories  and  prosperity,  and  they 
rapidly  retraced  their  steps  along  the  road  which 
to  them  was  the  road  of  progress,  engulfed  in  a 
decadence  from  which  there  was  no  deliverance. 

This  decadence  was  by  no  means  retarded 
by  Christianity.  On  the  contrary,  it  had  pre- 
cipitated it,  by  overturning  the  religious  and 
patriotic  base  on  which  the  civil  life  of  the 
empire  was  founded.  Christianity  had  rational- 
ised morals  by  offering  to  the  world  the  principles 
of  brotherly  love  and  justice,  but  it  did  not 
rationalise  the  ideal  representations  of  human 
thought,  in  which,  on  the  contrary,  it  rendered 
still  more  decided  and  predominant  the  concep- 
tion of  the  supernatural. 

Christianity,  when  it  became  an  established 
and  predominant  Church,  gave  to  this  conception 
a  form  vigorously  dogmatic,  and  made  it  an 
instrument  to  imprison  thought  within  insuper- 
able barriers,  and  to  destroy  all  liberty  of 
movement.  Now,  liberty  of  thought  and  liberty 
of  labour  are  both  essential  factors  of  the  scientific 
cognisance  of  the  reality ;  without  these  there 
can  be   no   advance   of  civilisation   nor  secure 


630  JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


morality.  To  the  ancient  world  the  liberty  of 
labour  was  unknown,  and  the  Christian  world 
was  equally  ignorant  of  the  liberty  of  thought. 
Therefore,  neither  of  these  worlds  possessed  pro- 
gressive civilisation.  This  civilisation  did  not 
dawn  until  these  two  liberties  became  allied  in 
a  common  cause,  and  opened  to  the  human  mind 
the  path  by  which  it  might  arrive  at  rational 
knowledge,  and  weaken,  if  not  radically  destroy, 
the  anthropocentric  and  anthropomorphic  illusions 
by  which  man  recreates  in  his  mind  a  false  image 
of  the  real  world,  based  upon  an  erroneous 
conception. 

The  Emperor  Julian's  attempt  to  overthrow 
Christianity  and  to  persuade  the  world  to  return  to 
Hellenic  polytheism,  to  substitute  Hellenism  for 
Christianity,  is  most  interesting,  because  it  is  a 
symptom  and  a  proof  of  the  corruption  into  which 
Christianity  had  fallen,  when,  secure  from  persecu- 
tion and  recognised  as  a  legal  institution  and 
instrument  of  government,  it  was  no  longer  sub- 
jected to  those  conditions  to  which  it  owed  its 
virtues.  But  Julian's  attempt  is  to  be  condemned 
from  a  philosophical  and  historical  point  of  view. 
From  a  philosophical  point  of  view,  because  it  did 
not  give  the  faintest  indication  of  a  thought  that 
strove  to  free  itself  from  the  fetters  of  the  prevailing 
ideas  of  the  times,  and  only  represented,  in  another 
aspect,  a  thought  that  remained  unchanged,  tending 


CONCLUSION 


631 


to  sink  the  reason  of  man  deeper  in  the  myster- 
ious and  gloomy  shadows  of  the  irrational,  and  to 
substitute  for  the  fruitful  religious  principles  of 
Christianity  the  sterile  formalism  of  lifeless  phan- 
toms. It  has  no  historical  value,  because  it  passed 
as  an  ephemeral  dream,  without  leaving  the  slightest 
trace.  It  was  only  a  sign  of  the  times,  a  sign  that 
the  ancient  world  was  rapidly  falling  into  ruin,  and 
that,  among  these  ruins,  Christianity  alone  remained 
standing ;  Christianity,  conqueror  even  of  the  bar- 
barians, to  whom  it  transmitted  the  miserable  relics 
of  a  civilisation  of  which  it  was  the  sole  heir,  after 
having  destroyed  it.  It  was  to  save  this  civilisation 
that  the  unhappy  Julian  sought  to  raise  from  their 
tombs  the  exhausted  battalions  of  the  gods  of 
Hellas. 

But  although  this  attempt  was  foolish  and 
destined  to  perish,  if  it  reveals  a  strange  lack  of 
foresight  in  him  who  promoted  it,  if  we  smile  at  the 
transport  of  mystical  superstition  in  a  man  who 
pretended  to  oppose  Christianity,  and  smile  no  less 
over  the  illusions  of  this  thinker  who  did  not 
perceive  that  he  revolved  in  the  same  circle  of 
thought  as  his  enemy,  if  we  reprove  the  intellectual 
prejudices  that  did  not  permit  him  to  discover, 
under  the  corruption  of  Christianity,  the  vivifying 
principle  that  Christianity  presented  to  the  world, 
— we  cannot  exclude  from  our  souls  an  intense 
sympathy  for  the  man  who,  disappearing  from  the 
world  at  such  an  early  age,  still  left  in  his  actions 


632 


JULIAN  THE  APOSTATE 


an  admirable  example  of  heroism,  enthusiasm,  and 
faith,  who  sacrificed  his  fortune  and  the  immense 
power  he  had  conquered  to  one  idea,  who,  poet  and 
soldier,  fearless  of  all  consequences,  persecuted  in 
the  early  years  of  his  life,  then  suddenly  raised  to 
the  summit  of  glory  and  power,  seldom  permitted 
the  serenity  of  his  thoughts  and  will  to  be  dis- 
turbed, and  ever  kept  before  him  the  idea  that  was 
the  guiding  star  of  his  existence.  The  Emperor 
Julian  seems  as  a  fugitive  and  luminous  apparition 
on  the  horizon  beneath  which  had  already  dis- 
appeared the  star  of  that  Greece,  which  to  him  was 
the  Holy  Land  of  civilisation,  the  mother  of  all 
that  was  good  and  beautiful  in  the  world,  of  that 
Greece  which,  with  filial  and  enthusiastic  devotion, 
he  called  his  only  true  country  —  ttjv  aXrjOcvrjv 
TrarplSa, 


THE  END. 


INDEX 


Acacius,  i68. 
Acantia,  352-3. 

Acerenza,  bust  of,  xxvii-xxxiv. 
^desius,  16,  41,  205,  207. 
^dychius,  372,  570-1. 
Aetius,  166-8,  358-62. 
Alexander,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  156-60. 
Alexander,  Prefect  of  SjTia,  119. 
Alexandrians,  Julian's  edicts  to  the,  340-4, 
372-81. 

d'Alfonso's  Essay  on  Julian,  509. 
Aligild,  106. 

AUard's  Julien  TApostat,  19,  498. 
Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  145,  172,  181, 

290. 
Amid,  90. 

Ammianus  Marcellinus,  his  description  of 
Julian's  personal  appearance,  xxxi ;  his 
career  and  character,  5-7  ;  his  account  of 
the  Persian  expedition,  122-32,  of  Julian's 
death,  133,  137,  144  ;  his  opinion  of  the 
School  Law,  404-5,  of  Julian's  religious 
enterprise,  425,  of  the  Misopogon,  433; 
his  panegj-ric  on  Julian,  472-5  ;  his  accusa- 
tions against  Eusebia,  579,  584-8. 

Ammonius  Saccas,  193-4,  198. 

Amoerius,  Julian's  letter  to,  559-61. 

Antiochians,  dissensions  between  them  and 
Julian,  432-70. 

Apodemius,  109. 

Arbetio,  106,  108,  109. 

Arethusa,  massacre  at,  344. 

Arianism,  37-8,  148  ;  moral  corruption  in, 
39 ;  its  origin,  155 ;  its  struggle  with 
Orthodoxy,  156-73  ;  opposed  to  monach- 
ism,  181  ;  its  distrust  of  metaphysical 
ideas,  187. 

Arius,  156;  his  doctrines,  159;  returns  to 
Alexandria,  163  ;  his  death,  164. 

Arsaces,  King  of  Armenia,  120. 

Arsacius,  High  Priest  of  Galatia,  Julian's 
letter  to,  297,  314-20,  421. 

Artemius,  339. 

Athanasius,  37-9,  145,  157-61,  164 ;  perse- 
cuted by  Constantius,  165-6;  his  writings, 
170  ;  his  personality  and  career,  362-81. 

Athens,  Julian's  sojourn  in,  47-51. 

Augustine,  St.,  161,  173-4,  181,  187,  198, 
202,  240,  290,  396. 

Babylas  the  MartjT,  354-7. 
Bacchylides,  Julian's  love  for,  66. 
Banquet  of  the  Ccesars,  513. 
Barbatius,  68. 


Barnabas,  Epistle  of,  599. 
Basil  of  Ancj-ra,  166,  168. 
Basil,  friend  of  Julian,  561-3. 
Basil  the  Great,  171  ;  apocrj-phal  letter  to, 
563. 

Basilina,  mother  of  Julian,  28. 
Bidet,  2QO. 

Boissier's  chapter  on  Julian,  21. 
Bostra,  Julian's  letter  to  the  inhabitants  of, 
337-8,  381-7. 

Caesarea  Mazaca,  tumults  at,  344. 
Callistus,  153. 
Canius,  St.,  xxviii. 
Celsus,  4,  272,  291-4. 

Christianity,  dissensions  in,  131-86 ;  its 
gradual  transformation  during  the  second 
and  third  centuries,  143  ;  its  strong  organi- 
sation, 144  ;  its  assumption  of  pagan  and 
worldly  forms,  174-80;  growth  of  monach- 
ism,  181-3,  606  ;  Julian's  attitude,  222- 
320  ;  his  hostile  action,  321-420  ;  contrast 
between  Christianity  and  Julian's  re- 
formed polytheism,  606-16  ;  its  failure  to 
regenerate  ancient  society,  183-4,  622-30. 
(See  also  Athanasius,  Arianism,  and  many 
other  such  names.) 

Christians,  Julian's  treatise  against  the, 
271-94-. 

Chrysantius,  16,  41,  206-15. 

Cinegius,  346,  352-3. 

Clement  of  Alexandria,  150,  603. 

Conodomarius,  68-70. 

Constans,  son  ofConstantine,  25,  27  ;  defends 
the  Orthodox  cause,  165,  367. 

Constantina,  wife  of  Gallus,  44. 

Constantine  i.,  25,  145  ;  political  motives  for 
his  treatment  of  Christianity,  146-8,  190, 
389-93;  his  letter,  "  Quos  ego,"  158; 
convenes  Council  of  Nicaea,  161  ;  Julian's 
description  of  him,  257 ;  introduced  into 
The  Bafiquet  of  the  Ccesars,  515-24. 

Constantine  11.,  25,  27. 

Constantinople,  Julian's  triumphal  entry 
into,  107  ;  its  court  purged,  108-11. 

Constantius  11.,  massacres  his  relatives,  25  ; 
master  of  the  whole  Empire,  27  ;  sends 
Julian  to  Macellum,  33,  and  to  Nicomedia, 
40  ;  instigates  the  assassination  of  Gallus, 
43  ;  sends  Julian  to  Athens,  47  ;  names 
Julian  Caesar,  55,  and  sends  him  to  Gaul, 
57  ;  orders  him  to  transfer  his  troops  to 
Persia,  77,  90  ;  furious  at  news  of  Julian's 
revolt,  92  ;  conspires  with  the  barbarians 


634 


INDEX 


against  Julian,  05 ;  his  campaign  against 
the  Persians,  115  ;  his  death,  106  ;  favours 
the  Arians,  164-9,  222  ;  his  anti-Pagan 
edict,  345  ;  praised  by  Gregory  of 
Nazianzus,  489 ;  JuHan's  discourses  in 
his  honour,  507-12  ;  his  dealings  with 
Sallustius,  539. 

Constantius,  Julius,  father  of  Julian,  25. 

Crispus,  murder  of,  by  his  father  Constantine, 
261. 

Ctesiphon,  siege  abandoned  by  Julian,  127. 

Cumont,  290. 

Cynicism,  253-4. 

Cyril  of  Alexandria,  272,  320. 

Dagalaif,  102. 
Decentius,  77,  82. 
Deodorus,  339. 
Dionysius  of  Alba,  166. 
Domitianus,  the  prefect,  360. 
Dracontius,  339. 

Elpidius,  94. 
Epictetus,  Bishop,  96. 
Epicurus,  305-6. 

Eugenius,  Julian's  letter  to,  558-9. 
Eumenes,  218  ;  Julian's  letter  to,  219. 
Eunapius,  his  history  and  Lives  of  the 

Sophists,  16  ;  his  account  of  lamblichus, 

203.  _ 

Eusebia,  wife  of  Constantius  11.,  protects 
Julian,  45-7 ;  persuades  Constantius  to 
name  Julian  Caesar,  55  ;  Julian's  affection 
for,  and  panegyric  of  her,  58,  512  ;  her 
death,  90 ;  her  alleged  poisoning  of 
Helena,  and  illicit  relations  with  Julian, 

94,  579-po- 

Eusebius  the  Eunuch.  89,  109,  332,  569. 

Eusebius  the  Neo-Platonist,  41,  206-9. 

Eusebius,  Bishop  of  Nicomeclia,  related  to 
Julian,  25  ;  teacher  of  Julian,  27  ;  death 
of,  33  ;  accused  by  Alexander  of  heresy, 
158 ;  his  Semi-Arian  formula,  163  ;  re- 
admitted to  Constantine's  favour,  163 ; 
his  hostility  to  Athanasius,  365-7. 

Eusebius  of  Vercelli,  166. 

Euterius,  92. 

Evargius,  Julian's  letter  to,  564-6. 
Evemerus,  67,  87. 

Florentius,  Prefect  of  the  Pretorium,  72-5, 

77,  80-2,  loi,  567-9. 
France,  Anatole,  on  the  relations  between 

Eusebia  and  Julian,  580. 
French  Associations  Law'  compared  with 

Julian's  School  Law,  419. 

Gabelli,  414. 

"Galilean,  Thou  hast  Conquered!"  the 

famous  saying,  141. 
Gallus,  brother  of  Julian,  26,  33,  355,  360 ; 

appointed  Caesar,  39  ;  assassinated,  43  ; 

his  character,  44. 
Gardner,  Alice,  her  Julian,  Philosopher 

and  Emperor,  22. 
Gaudentius,  80. 

Gaul,  Julian's  campaign  in,  57-100. 

Gaza,  massacre  at,  344. 

George,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  36-7,  338-43, 

369,  570-2. 
Germinius,  168. 

Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall,  19. 
Gnosticism,  151,  601. 
Gomoarius,  106. 


Gospel,  the  Fourth,  234-6,  601. 
Gratian,  172-3,  181. 

Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  171  ;  his  bitter  enmity 
to  Julian,  11,  320;  his  discourses,  12; 
contrasted  with  Libanius,  12 ;  his  ac- 
count of  the  confinement  of  Julian  and 
Gallus,  34-6  ;  his  recognition  of  the  cor- 
ruption of  Christians,  39  ;  his  description 
of  Julian  when  at  Athens,  xxx,  49-51 ;  his 
general  account  of  Julian,  488-506. 

Gregory  of  Nyssa,  171. 

Hakusaki,  269-70. 

Harnack's  article  on  Julian,  21. 

Hecebolius,  tutor  of  Julian,  40-1. 

Helena,  wife  of  Julian ;  her  marriage,  57  ; 

her  death,  94,  579-90. 
Hellenism,  Julian's  education  by  Mardonius 

in,  28-32,  37  ;  his  bo3'ish  defence  of,  36  ; 

his  conversion  to,  42  ;  his  restoration  of, 

III,  187.    (See  also  Neo-Platonism.) 
Heraclius,  Julian's  discourse  against,  252- 

60. 

Hermogenes,  Julian's  letter  to,  333-4. 

Hilarj^  171. 

Hippolytus,  153. 

Hosius,  Bishop  of  Cordova,  161. 

lamblichus,  193,  203-5  5  Julian's  letters  to, 

xvi,  550-4. 
Irenaeus,  603. 

Jesus  Christ  introduced  into  the  Banquet  of 

the  Ccpsars,  521-4. 
Jovinus,  100. 
Jovius,  100. 

Judaism,  Julian's  account  of,  275-89 ;  his 
attitude  towards  the  Jews,  303-4,  310-4. 

Julian  (Flavius  Claudius  Julianus),  the  per- 
sonification of  the  Pagan  reaction,  xxiii ; 
polemical  attitude  of  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion towards  him,  1-5 ;  interest  of  his 
character  and  career,  2  ;  sources  for  his 
biography,  5-22  ;  his  writings,  13-5  ;  his 
career,  a  singular  historical  problem,  22- 
4 ;  his  birth  and  parentage,  25  ;  child- 
hood, 27-33  ;  confinement  at  Macellum, 
33-9 ;  sent  to  Nicomedia,  40 ;  conversion 
to  Hellenism,  41 ;  protected  by  Eusebia, 
45-7  ;  stay  at  Athens,  47-51 ;  intercourse 
with  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  48-51 ;  called 
to  Milan,  52  ;  named  Caesar,  55  ;  married 
to  Helena,  57  ;  sets  out  for  Gaul,  57  ;  his 
marvellous  administration  of  Gaul,  62-5  ; 
his  first  campaign,  66  ;  defeats  Conodo- 
marius  at  Strassburg,  70 ;  campaigns  of, 
74-6,  358,  359,  ;  proclaimed  Emperor  by 
the  troops  in  Paris,  79 ;  reasons  of  his 
rebellion,  91  ;  his  letter  to  Constantius, 
92  ;  fresh  campaign  across  the  Rhine,  94  ; 
death  of  his  wife,  94  ;  discovers  conspiracj' 
between  Constantius  and  the  barbarians, 
95  ;  conceals  conversion  to  paganism,  97  ; 
advance  along  the  Danube,  100-4  '■>  entry 
into  Constantinople,  107  ;  purges  the  Court 
of  Constantinople,  108-9,  331-4  5  restores 
the  worship  of  the  gods,  in  ;  campaign 
against  the  Persians,  113-32  ;  death,  132  ; 
attitude  towards  Christian  divisions,  169  ; 
his  Neo-Platonist  teachers,  203-18 ;  his 
theology,  225-320  ;  his  discourse  to  King 
Sun,  231-41  ;  his  Discourse  to  the  Mother 
of  the  Gods,  241-51 ;  his  Discourse  against 
Heraclius,  252  ;  reasons  of  the  failure  of 


INDEX 


635 


his  Anti-Christian  propaganda,  264-71, 
319 ;  his  treatise  against  the  Christians, 
271-94  ;  his  desire  for  a  Christianised 
polytheism,  294-320 ;  his  letters  to  Arsa- 
cius,  Theodorus,  and  an  unknown  person, 
297-320  ;  his  tolerance,  324-62,  498-503  ; 
his  edicts  to  the  Alexandrians,  338-44, 
372-81 ;  his  conflict  with  Athanasius,  362- 
81 ;  his  letter  to  the  people  of  Bostra, 
381-7 ;  his  School  Law,  394-420 ;  his 
Misopogon,  430-63,  469 ;  description  of 
him  by  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  472-4, 
by  Libanius,  474-8,  by  Gregory  of  Nazi- 
anzus,  488-506  ;  his  superstition,  485-8  ; 
his  Banqttei  0/ the  Ci^sars,  513-26;  his 
letters,  526,  550-72  ;  his  Epistle  to  The- 
mistius,  527-38  ;  his  Exhortation  to  Sal- 
lustius,  539-47  ;  his  wise  administration, 
573-8 ;  his  relations  to  Eusebia  and  his 
wife  Helena,  579-90  ;  reasons  of  the  failure 
of  his  schemes,  591-631. 

Julius  Caesar,  introduced  into  the  Banquet 
of  the  Ccesars,  514-20. 

Julius  I.,  Pope,  366. 

Justina,  172. 

Keim,  Theodor,  272, 

Koch's  work  on  Julian,  20,  88. 

Lenormant,  F.,  on  the  bust  of  Acerenza, 

xxvii-xxx. 
Leonas,  the  Quaestor,  93. 
Leontius,  359. 
Leopardi,  620-1. 

Libanius,  5 ;  his  literary  career  and  writ- 
ings, 7-9,  400  ;  his  enthusiasm  for  Julian, 
9  ;  his  discourses,  9  and  10 ;  contrasted 
with  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  12 ;  dis- 
pleasure at  Hecebolius'  influence  over 
Julian,  40  ;  Julian  reads  his  lectures,  41  ; 
his  account  of  Julian  at  Athens,  48,  of  the 
treachery  of  Constantius,  96,  of  Julian's 
advance  along  the  Danube,  101-21,  of  the 
Court  of  Constantius,  no,  of  the  Persian 
expedition,  122-33,  of  Julian's  death, 
i33"7>  i39»  ^^44)  of  Julian's  tolerance, 
330  ;  his  discourse  "About  Temples,"  346- 
54,  495  ;  letter  of  Julian  to  him,  422-4, 

556-  7  ;  his  discourse  to  the  Antiochians, 
465-8 ;  general  description  of  Julian's 
character,  474-88. 

Licinius,  the  Emperor,  145. 

Logos  doctrine,  Controversies,  148-61 ;  pro- 
logue of  the  Fourth  Gospel  compared  with 
Julian's  teaching,  234-6. 

Lucian  of  Antioch,  154-5. 

Lucillianus,  80,  102. 

Lupicinus,  77,  81-2. 

Macellum,  Julian  confined  at,  33-9. 
Magnentius,  27,  165. 
Marangas,  battle  of,  130. 
Marcellus,  67. 

Marcus  Aurelius,  Julian  compared  with, 
63 ;  introduced  into  the  Banquet  of  the 
Ccesars,  513-20. 

Mardonius,  teacher  of  Julian,  28-32,  447. 

Marius  Victorinus,  171. 

Martianus,  104. 

Martins  the  Quaestor,  360, 

Maximus,  17,  41-2,  87,  206-14,  322-4,  548-9, 

557-  3. 

Milan,  Council  of,  166. 
Milan,  Edict  of,  145,  147,  369. 


Milan,  Julian's  first  stay  at,  45  ;  his  second 

visit  to,  52-7. 
Minucius  Felix,  599. 
Misopogon,  28,  140,  273,  430. 
Monachism,  181-3,  295,  299,  606. 
Monarchianism,  151-4  ;  its  two  schools,  152. 
Mother   of  the  Gods,   discourse  to  the, 

241-51. 

Mucke's  Flavius  Claudius  Julianus.  20. 
Muller,  175. 

Nahrmalcha,  siege  of,  124. 
Naville's  book  on  the  philosophy  of  Julian, 
20. 

Nebridius,  82,  93,  99. 

Necrologia  of  Libanius,  474. 

Neo-Platonism,  xiv,  xv  ;  its  influence  on 
Julian,  41-3,  555  ;  its  belief  in  the  super- 
natural, 121,  226-9  ;  its  ideals,  144, 
184-221  ;  its  exponents,  193-218 ;  com- 
pared with  Christianity,  144,  186-8,  199, 
221,  228,  601-3. 

Neumann's  work  on  Julian,  20,  272. 

Nevitas,  100,  103. 

Nicaea,  Council  of,  161-3. 

Nicopedia,  Julian's  stay  in,  40-3. 

Nigrinus,  104. 

Oribasius  of  Pergamum,  17,  86-7,  215-6  ; 

Julian's  letter  to,  567. 
Origen,  his  doctrines  and  profound  influence 

on  subsequent  speculation,  150,  173,  186, 

198,  603. 

Origenism,  or  Semi-Arianism,  162-73,  357-8. 

Palladius,  109. 
Panaetius,  605. 

Paris,  Julian's  revolt  at,  76-93. 
Patripassianism,  153. 
Paul,  St.,  265,  270,  277,  598. 
Paul,  courtier  of  Constantius,  log. 
Paul  of  Samosata,  152,  154-5,  i73' 
Paul,  a  spy,  80. 
Paulinus  of  Treves,  166. 
Pegasius,  426-30. 
Pentadius,  80,  82,  92. 

Persians,  Julian's  campaign  against,  70, 
"3>  525;  Constantius'  campaign  against, 
115. 

Pharianus,  218  ;  Julian's  letter  to,  219. 

Philostorgius,  the  Arian,  18. 

Plato,  188,  281,  531. 

Plotinus,  193-200,  602. 

Polycletes,  94. 

Pontitianus,  181. 

Porphyry,  the  Neo-Platonist,   151,  193-4, 

197,  202-4,  272-3. 
Porphyry,  official  in  Egypt,  Julian's  letter 

to,  571-2. _ 

Postal  Service,  Julian's  re  organisation  of, 
T.  575-8. 
Prsresius  416. 

Priesthood,  Julian's  ideal  of,  300,  304. 
Priscus,  16,  206-7,  212-3. 
Proclus,  193. 
Procopius,  120. 
Pyrisaboras,  taking  of,  124. 
Pyrrho,  305. 

Reinach,  Salomon,  on  the  bust  of  Acerenza, 

xxix,  xxxiii-iv. 
Rimini,  Synod  of,  169,  358. 
Rode's  history  of  Julian's  reaction,  21,  38, 

498. 


636 


INDEX 


Rufinus,  his  continuation  of  the  Historj'  of 
Eusebius  and  his  account  of  the  reaction 
of  Julian,  i8. 


Sabellianism,  153. 

Saints,  Worship  of,  177,  287,  354,  614. 
Sallustius,  81,  100,  121,  217,  539  ;  JuHan's 

Exhortation  to  him,  538-47. 
Sapores(Shapur),  King  of  Persia,  115, 129-30. 
Scientific   spirit,   lacking   in  the  ancient 

world,  622-30. 
School  Law,  Julian's,  394-420. 
Sebastian,  120. 
Seleucia,  Synod  of,  169,  358. 
Shapur.    See  Sapores. 
Simplicianus,  416. 
Silvanus,  6,  51,  55. 
Sirmium,  conspiracy  at,  51,  54. 
Socrates,  the  historian,  his  account  of  Julian, 

18,   of  the  expurgation  of  Constantius' 

Court,  III,  of  Julian's  tolerance,  328-9. 
Sopater,  424. 

Sozomenes,  his  re-editing  of  the  History  of 
Socrates,  18 ;  his  view  of  the  murder 
of  Julian,  137,  of  Constantine's  conver- 
sion, 46,  of  Julian's  alleged  persecutions, 
329-30. 

Stoicism,  254. 

Strassburg,  Battle  of,  68-71. 
Strauss,  19,  229. 
Sun,  discourse  to  the,  221-31. 
Syrianus,  367. 


Tatian,  327. 
Taurus,  loi. 
TertuUian,  153,  603. 
Thalia  of  Arius,  159. 

Themistius,  Julian's  letter  to,  xxx,  527-38. 
Theodoret,  18,  40. 

Theodoras,  Julian's  letter  to,  297,  309. 

Theodosius  I.,  10,  145,  171,  173,  181,  346-54. 

Theodulus,  327. 

Theognis  of  Nicaea,  163. 

Theolaiphus,  106. 

Tigris,  passage  of  the,  126. 

Titus,  Bishop  of  Bostra,  382-7. 

Ursacius,  168. 
Ursicinus,  9. 
Ursulus,  109. 

Vadomarius,  95. 
Valensj  168. 
Valentinianus  il.,  172. 
Vespasian,  44. 

Victor,  Aurelius,  historian,  103. 
Villari's  Barbarian  Invasions,  19. 
Vollert's  work  on  Julian's  opinions,  21. 

Waldeck-Rousseau,  418. 

Zenobia,  152. 
Zephyrinus,  153. 

Zosimus,  his  testimony  to  JuHan's  great- 
ness, 17 ;  his  account  of  the  Persian 
expedition,  122. 


Printed  by  MoRRisoN  &  Gibb  Limited,  Edinburgh 


DATE  DUE 


GAYLORD        #3523PI      Printed  in  USA 


